Notes and Queries, Number 73, March 22, 1851

When, in the opening Number of the present Volume (p. 14), we called the attention of our readers to the Monumentarium of Exeter Cathedral, we expressed a hope that the good services which Mr. Hewett had thereby rendered to all genealogical, antiquarian, and historical inquirers would be so obvious as to lead a number of labourers into the same useful field. That hope bids fair to be fully realised. In Vol. iii., p. 116., we printed a letter from Mr. Peacock, announcing his intention of copying the inscriptions in the churches and churchyards of the Hundred of Manley; and we this week present our readers with three fresh communications upon the subject.

We give precedence to Miss Bockett's, inasmuch as it involves no general proposal upon the subject, but is merely expressive of that lady's willingness, in which we have no doubt she will be followed by many of her countrywomen to help forward the good work.

In your Number for Feb. 15th, I find Mr. Edward Peacock, Jun., of Bottesford Moors, Messingham, Kirton Lindsey, wishes to collect church memorials for work he intends to publish. If he would like the accounts of monuments in the immediate neighbourhood of Reading, as far as I am able it would give me pleasure to send some to him.

Southcote Lodge, near Reading.

The second makes us acquainted with a plan for the publication of a Monumenta Anglicana by Mr. Dunkin,—a plan which would have our hearty concurrence and recommendation, if it were at all practicable; but which, it will be seen at a glance, must fail from its very vastness. If the Monumentarium of Exeter contains the material for half a moderate-sized octavo volume, in what number of volumes does Mr. Dunkin propose to complete his collection—even if a want of purchasers of the early volumes did not nip in the bud his praiseworthy and well-intentioned scheme?

Your correspondent Mr. Edw. Peacock, Jun, may be interested in knowing that a work has some time been projected by my friend Mr. Alfred John Dunkin of Dartford (whose industry and antiquarian learning render him well fitted for the task), under the title of Monumenta Anglicana, and which is intended to be a medium for preserving the inscriptions in every church in the kingdom. There can be no doubt of the high value and utility of such a work, especially if accompanied by a well-arranged index of names; and I have no doubt Mr. Peacock, and indeed many others of your valued correspondents, will be induced to assist in the good cause, by sending memoranda of inscriptions to Mr. Dunkin.

Plymouth.

The following letter from the Rev. E. S. Taylor proposes a Society for the purpose:—

I for one shall be happy to co-operate with Mr. Peacock in this useful work; and I trust that, through the valuable medium of "Notes And Queries," many will be induced to offer their assistance. Could not a Society be formed for the purpose, so that mutual correspondence might take place?

Martham, Norfolk.

We doubt the necessity, and indeed the advisability, of the formation of any such Society.

Mr. Peacock (antè., p. 117.) has already wisely suggested, that "in time a copy of every inscription in every church in England might be ready for reference in our National Library," and we have as little doubt that the MS. department of the British Museum is the proper place of deposit for such records, as that the trustees would willingly accept the charge of them on the recommendation of their present able and active Keeper of the Manuscripts. What he, and what the trustees would require, would be some security that the documents were what they professed to be; and this might very properly be accomplished through the agency of such a Society as Mr. Taylor proposes, if there did not already exist a Society upon whom such a duty might very safely be devolved:—and have we not, in the greater energy which that Society has lately displayed, evidence that it would undertake a duty for which it seems pre-eminently fitted? We allude to the Society of Antiquaries. The anxiety of Lord Mahon, its president, to promote the efficiency of that Society, has recently been made evident in many ways; and we cannot doubt that he would sanction the formation of a sub-committee for the purpose of assisting in collecting and preserving a record of all existing monuments, or that he would find a lack of able men to serve on such a committee, when he numbers among the official or active Fellows of the Society gentlemen so peculiarly fitted to carry out this important national object, as Mr. Hunter, Sir Charles Young, Mr. J. Payne Collier, and Mr. Bruce.

Notes

ON THE WORD "RACK" IN SHAKSPEARE'S TEMPEST

As another illustration of the careless or superficial manner in which the meaning of Shakspeare has been sought, allow me to call attention to the celebrated passage in the Tempest in which the word "rack" occurs. The passage really presents no difficulty; and the meaning of the word, as it appears to me, might as well be settled at once and for ever. I make this assertion, not dogmatically, but with the view of testing the correctness of my opinion, that this is not at all a question of etymology, but entirely one of construction. The passage reads as follows:—

"These, our actors,As I foretold you, were all spirits, andAre melted into air, into thin air:And, like the baseless fabrick of this vision,The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces,The solemn temples, the great globe itself,Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve;And, like this insubstantial pageant, faded,Leave not a rack behind."—Tempest, Act IV. Sc. 1.

As I have expressed my opinion that this is not at all a question of etymology, I shall not say more in reference to this view of the case than that "rack," spelt as in Shakspeare, is a word in popular and every-day use in the phrase "rack and ruin;" that we have it in the term "rack off," as applied to wine, meaning to take from the rack, or, in other words, "to leave a rack" or refuse "behind," racked wine being wine drawn from the lees; and that it is, I believe, still in use in parts of England, meaning remains or refuse, as, in the low German, "der Wraek" means the same thing. Misled, however, by an unusual mode of spelling, and unacquainted with the literature of Shakspeare's age, certain of the commentators suggested the readings of track and trace; whereupon Horne Tooke remarks:—

"The ignorance and presumption of his commentators have shamefully disfigured Shakspeare's text. The first folio, notwithstanding some few palpable misprints, requires none of their alterations. Had they understood English as well as he did, they would not have quarrelled with his language."—Diversions of Purley, p. 595.

He proceeds to show that rack "is merely the past tense, and therefore past participle,

or

, of the Anglo-Saxon verb Recan, exhalare, to reek;" and although the advocates of its being a particular description of light cloud refer to him as an authority for their reading, he treats it throughout generally as "a vapour, a steam, or an exhalation." But Horne Tooke, in his zeal as an etymologist, forgot altogether to attend to the construction of the passage. What is it that shall "leave not a rack behind?" A rack of what? Not of the baseless fabric of this vision, like which the "cloud-capp'd towers shall dissolve,"—not of this insubstantial pageant, like which they shall have faded,—but of "the cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces, the solemn temples, the great globe itself." There is in fact a double comparison; but the construction and the meaning are perfectly clear, and no word will suit the passage but one that shall express a result common to the different objects enumerated. A cloud may be a fit object for comparison, but it is utterly inconsequential; while the sense required can only be expressed by a general term, such as remains, a vestige, or a trace.

I beg now to transcribe a note Of Mr. Collier's on this passage:—

"'Rack' is vapour, from reck, as Horne Tooke showed; and the light clouds on the face of heaven are the 'rack,' or vapour from the earth. The word 'rack' was often used in this way."—Coll. Shaksp., vol. i. p. 70.

Mr. Knight appears to incline to the same view; and regarding these as the two latest authorities, and finding in neither of them any reference to the question of construction, I naturally concluded that the point had been overlooked by the commentators. On reference, however, I found to my surprise, that Malone, for the very same reasons, had come to the same conclusion. Had Malone's argument been briefly stated by the "two latest and best editors," I should, of course, have had no occasion to trouble you with this note: and this instance, it appears to me, furnishes additional reasons for enforcing the principle for which I am contending; the neglect of it affecting, in however slight a degree, the sense or correctness of so important and frequently quoted a passage. For my own part, I should have thought that the commonest faith in Shakspeare would have protected any editor, whose avowed object it was to restore the text, from preferring in this instance, to the plain common sense of Malone, the more showy authority of Horne Tooke.

In my last paper I wrote,—"So far as quantity is concerned, to eat a crocodile would be no more than to eat an ox." You have omitted the negative.

Samuel Hickson.

Minor Notes

Original Warrant.—The following warrant from the original in the Surrenden collection may interest some of your correspondents, as bearing upon more than one Query that has appeared in your columns:—

"Forasmuch as Sr John Payton, Knight, Lieutenant of the Tower, hath heretofore receaved a warrant from the Lls. of the counsell, by her Mats commandment, for the removinge of Wright the Preist out of the Tower, to Framingham Castle, and for that, since then, it is thought more convenient, that he be removed to the Clincke—Theise therefore shalbe to require now (sic) to enlarge him of his imprisonment in the Tower, and to deliver him prisoner into the hands of the L. Bishop of London, to be committed by his Lp. to the Clincke, because it is for her Mts speciall service,—for doinge whereof, this shalbe your warrant.

"I have receyed Mr. Wryght from Mr. Derynge, Deputy Lieutenant, and have comitted him to the Clincke according the direction from Mr. Secretary above expressed.

Gloves.—Prince Rupert.—In your First Vol., pp. 72. 405., and in other places in Vol. ii., there are notices with respect to the presentation of gloves. If what is contained in the following paper be not generally known, it may claim an interest with some of your readers:—

"At the Court of Whitehall, the 23rd of October, 1678. Present

"Whereas formerly it hath been a custom upon the Consecra[~c]on of all [~B]ps for them to make presents of Gloves to all Persons that came to the Consecra[~c]on Dinners, and others, wch amounted to a great Su[~m] of Money, and was an unnecessary burden to them, His Matie this day, taking the same into his considera[~c]on, was thereupon pleas'd to order in Council, that for the future there shall be no such distribu[~c]on of Gloves; but that in lieu thereof each Lord B[~p] before his Consecra[~c]on shall hereafter pay the Su[~m] of 50l. to be employ'd towards the Rebuilding of the Cathedral Church of St. Paul. And it was further ordered, that his Grace the Lord Archb[~p] of Canterbury do not proceed to consecrate any B[~p] before he hath paid the s[~d] Su[~m] of 50l. for the use aforesaid, and produced a Receipt for the same from the Treasurer of the Money for Rebuilding the said Church for the time being, wch as it is a pious work, so will it be some ease to the respective B[~p]s, in regard the Expense of Gloves did usually farr exceed that Sum.

Tanner's MSS. vol. 282. 112. al. 74.

One of your correspondents, I think, some time back asked for notices of Prince Rupert posterior to the Restoration. Besides the mention made of him in this paper, Echard speaks of his having the command of one squadron of the English fleet in the Dutch war.

Inscription on a Gun (Vol. iii., p. 181.).—Your notes on "the Potter's and Shepherd's Keepsakes" remind me of an old gun, often handled by me in my youth, on the stock of which the following tetrastick was en-nailed:—

Whether this testamentary disposition ever passed through Doctors' Commons, I know not.

Richard III. (Vol. iii., pp. 206-7.).—The statement by Mr. Harrison, that Richard was not a "hunchback," is curiously "backed" by an ingenious conjecture of that very remarkable man, Doctor John Wallis of Oxford, in his Grammatica Linguæ Anglicanæ, first published in 1653. The passage occurs in the 2d section of chapter 14, "De Etymologia." Wallis is treating of the words crook, crouch, cross, &c., and says:

"Hinc item croisado de militibus dicebatur ad bellum (quod vocant) sanctum conscriptis (pro recuperanda terra sancta) qui à tergo gestabant formam Crucis; et Richardus olim Rex Angliæ dicebatur crouch-backed, non quod dorso fucrit incurvato, sed quod à tergo gestare gestiebat formam Crucis."

Edinburgh.

Lines by Pope.—On the back of a letter in my possession, written by the poet Gray, are the following lines in the handwriting of his friend Mason:—

"Wrote in Evelyn's book of coins given by Mr. Wood to Kent: he had objected against the word pio in Mr. Pope's father's epitaph."

If these lines are not already in print, perhaps you will insert them amongst your "Notes" as a contribution from

Thimbleby Rectory, March 13. 1851.

Origin of St. Andrew's Cross in connexion with Scotland.—John Lesley, bishop of Ross, reports, that in the night before the battle between Athelstan, king of England, and Hungus, king of the Picts, a bright cross, like that whereon St. Andrew suffered, appeared to Hungus, who, having obtained the victory, ever after bore that figure. This happened in 819. Vide Gent. Mag. for Nov. 1732.

Snail-eating (Vol. iii., p. 207.).—Your correspondent C. W. B. does not seem to be aware that "a ragout of boror (snails)" is a regular dish with English gypsies. Vide Borrow's Zincali, part i. c. v.

He has clearly not read Mr. Borrow's remarks on the subject:

"Know then, O Gentile, whether thou be from the land of Gorgios (England), or the Busné (Spain), that the very gypsies, who consider a ragout of snails a delicious dish, will not touch an eel because it bears a resemblance to a snake; and that those who will feast on a roasted hedgehog could be induced by no money to taste a squirrel!"

Having tasted of roasted hotchiwitchu (hedgehog) myself among the "gentle Rommanys," I can bear witness to its delicate fatness; and though a ragout of snails was never offered for my acceptance, I do not think that those who consider (as most "Gorgios" do) stewed eels a delicacy ought to be too sever on "Limacotrophists!"

Snail-eating.—Perhaps you will permit me to remark, in reference to the communication of C. W. B., that snails are taken medicinally occasionally, and are supposed to be extremely strengthening. I have known them eagerly sought after for the meal of a consumptive patient. As a matter of taste, too, they are by some considered quite epicurean. A gentleman whom I used to know, was in the constant habit as he passed through the fields, of picking up the white slugs that lay in his way, and swallowing them with more relish than he would have done had they been oysters.

That snails make a no inconsiderable item in the bill of fare of gypsies, and other wanderers, I proved while at Oxford, some time ago; for passing up Shotover Hill, in the parish of Headington, I unexpectedly came upon a camp of gypsies who were seated round a wood fire enjoying their Sunday's dinner: this consisted of a considerable number of large snails roasted on the embers, and potatoes similarly cooked. On inquiry, I was told by those who were enjoying their repast, that they were extremely good, and were much liked by people of their class, who made a constant practice of eating them. I need hardly say that I received a most hospitable invitation to join in the feast, which I certainly declined.

Queries