J. Bs.
Rab Surdam (Vol. ii., p. 493.; Vol. iii., p. 42.).—May not "Rab Surdam" be the ignorant stone-cutter's version of "resurgam?"
M. A. H.
The Scaligers (Vol. iii., p. 133.).—Everything relating to this family is interesting, and I have read with pleasure your correspondent's communication on the origin of their armorial bearings. I am, however, rather surprised to observe, that he seems to take for granted the relationship of Julius Cæsar Scaliger and his son Joseph to the Lords of Verona, which has been so convincingly disproved by several writers. The world has been for some time pretty well satisfied that these two illustrious scholars were mere impostors in the claim they made, that Joseph Scaliger's letter to Janus Dousa was a very impudent affair. If your correspondent has met with any new evidence in support of their claim, it would gratify me much if he would make it known. Who would not derive pleasure from seeing the magnificent boast of Joseph proved at last to have been founded in fact:
"Ego sum septimus ab Imperatore Ludovico et Illustrissimâ Hollandiæ comite Margareta: septimus item a Mastino tertio, ut et magnus Rex Franciscus, literarum parcus."
and Scioppius's parting recommendation—
"Quid jam reliquum est tibi, nisi ut nomen commutes et ex Scalifero fias Furcifer?"—Scaliger Hypobolimaeus. Mogunt., 1607, 4to., p. 74. b.
deprived of its force and stringency? I fear, however, that this is not to be expected.
It is impossible to read Joseph Scaliger's defence of his own case in the rejoinder to Scioppius, Confutatio fabulæ Burdonum, without observing that the author utterly fails in connecting Niccolo, the great-grandfather of Joseph, with Guglielmo della Scala, the son of Can Grande Secundo. And yet such is the charm of genius, that the Confutatio, altogether defective in the main point as a reply, will ever be read with delight by succeeding generations of scholars.
James Crossley.
Manchester, Feb. 22, 1851.
Lincoln Missal (Vol. iii., p. 119.).—It is clear that one of the most learned ritualists, Mr. Maskell, did not know of a manuscript of the Lincoln Use, else he would have noted it in his work, The Ancient Liturgy of the British Church, where the other Uses of Salisbury, York, Bangor, and Hereford, are compared together. In his preface to this work (p. ix.) he states—
"It has been doubted whether there ever was a Lincoln Use in any other sense than a different mode and practice of chanting."
Mr. Peacock would probably find more information in the Monumenta Ritualia, to which Mr. Maskell refers in his preface.
N. E. R. (A Subscriber.)
By and bye (Vol. iii., p. 73.).—Your correspondent S. S., in support of his opinion that by the bye means "by the way," suggests that good bye may mean "bon voyage." I must say the commonly received notion, that it is a contraction of "God be wi' ye," appears to me in every way preferable. I think that in the writers of the Elizabethan age, every intermediate variety of form (such as "God b' w' ye," &c.) may be found; but I cannot at this moment lay my hand on any instance.
In an ingenious and amusing article in a late Number of the Quarterly, the character of different nations is shown to be indicated by their different forms of greeting, and surely the same may be said of their forms of taking leave. The English pride themselves, and with justice, on being a peculiarly religious people: now, applying the above test,—as the Frenchman has his adieu, the Italian his addio, the Portuguese his addios, and the Spaniard his "vaya usted con Dios,"—it is to be presumed that the Englishman, also, on parting from his friend, will commit him to the care of Providence. On the other hand, it must be admitted that the Germans, who, as well as the English, are supposed to entertain a deeper sense of religion than many other nations, content themselves with a mere "lebe-wohl." I should be obliged if some one of your readers will favour me with the forms of taking leave used by other nations, in order that I may be enabled to see whether the above test will hold good on a more extensive application.
X. Z.
Gregory the Great.—This is clearly a mere slip of the pen in Lady Morgan's pamphlet. I I think it may confidently be asserted that Gregory VII. has not been thus designated habitually at any period.
R. D. H.
True Blue (Vol. iii., p. 92.)—"The earliest connexion of the colour blue with truth" (which inquiry I cannot consider as synonymous with the original Query, Vol. ii., p. 494.) is doubtless to be traced back to one of the typical garments worn by the Jewish high priest, which was (see Godwyn's Moses and Aaron, London, 1631, lib. i. chap. 5.) "A robe all of blew, with seventy two bels of gold, and as many pomegranates, of blew, purple, and scarlet, upon the skirts thereof." He says that "by the bells was typed the sound of his (Christ's) doctrine; by the pomegranates the sweet savour of an holy life;" and, without doubt, by "the blew robe" was typified the immutability and truthfulness of the person, mission, and doctrine of our great High Priest, who was clothed with truth as with a garment. The great Antitype was a literal embodiment of the symbolic panoply of his lesser type.
Blowen.
Drachmarus (Vol. iii., p. 157.).—Your correspondent has my most cordial thanks both for his suggestion, and also for his conjecture.
1. Perhaps you will kindly afford me space to say, that the name of Drachmarus occurs in a well-written MS. account of Bishop Cosin's controversy, during his residence in Paris, with the Benedictine Prior Robinson, concerning the validity of our English ordination: in the course of which, after stating the opinion of divers of the Fathers, that the keys of order and jurisdiction were given John xx., "Quorum peccata," &c., Cosin adds:
"I omit Hugo Cardinalis, the ordinary gloss, Drachmarus, Scotus, as men of a later age (though all, as you say, of your church) that might be produced to the same purpose."
I should here perhaps state, that no letter of Prior Robinson's is extant in which any mention is made either of Drachmarus or of Druthmarus.
2. Before my Query was inserted, it had not only occurred to me as probable that the transcriber might have written Drachmarus in mistake for Druthmarus, but I had also consulted such of Druthmar's writings as are found in the Bibl. Patr. I came to the conclusion, however, that a later writer than Christian Druthmar was intended. My conjecture was, that Drachmarus must be a second name for some known writer of the age of the schoolmen, just as Carbajulus may be found cited under the name of Loysius, or Loisius, which are only other forms of his Christian name, Ludovicus.
J. Sansom.
The Brownes of Cowdray, Sussex.—E. H. Y. (Vol. iii., p. 66.) is wrong in assigning the title of Lord Mountacute to the Brownes of Cowdray, Sussex. In 1 & 2 Phil. and Mary, Sir Antony Browne (son of the Master of the Horse to Henry VIII.) was created Viscount Montague (Collins). When curate of Eastbourne, in which parish are situated the ruins of their ancestral Hall of Cowdray, I frequently heard the village dames recite the tales of the rude forefathers of the hamlet respecting the family.
They relate, that while the great Sir Antony (temp. Hen. VIII.) was holding a revel, a monk presented himself before the guests and pronounced the curse of fire and water against the male descendants of the family, till none should be left, because the knight had received and was retaining the church-lands of Battle Abbey, and those which belonged to the priory of Eastbourne. Within the last hundred years, destiny, though slow of foot, has overtaken the fated race. In one day the hall perished by fire, and the lord by water, as mentioned by E. H. Y. The male line being extinct, the estate passed to the sister of Lord Montague. This lady was married to the late W. S. Poyntz, Esq., M.P. The two sons of Mr. and Mrs. Poyntz were drowned at Bognor, and the estate a second time devolved on the female representatives. These ladies, still living, are the Marchioness of Exeter, the Countess Spencer, and the Dowager Lady Clinton. The estate passed by purchase into the hands of the Earl of Egmont.
The old villagers, the servants, and the descendants of servants of the family, point to the ruins of the hall, and religiously cling to the belief that its destruction and that of its lords resulted from the curse. It certainly seems an illustration of Archbishop Whitgift's words to Queen Elizabeth:
"Church-land added to an ancient inheritance hath proved like a moth fretting a garment, and secretly consumed both: or like the eagle that stole a coal from the altar, and thereby set her nest on fire, which consumed both her young eagles and herself that stole it."
E. Rds.
Queen's Col., Birm., Feb. 20. 1851.
Red Hand (Vol. ii., p. 506., et antè).—A correspondent, Arun, says, "Your correspondents would confer a heraldic benefit if they would point out other instances, which I believe to exist, where family reputation has been damaged by similar ignorance in heraldic interpretation." I have always thought this ignorance to be universal with the country people in England: I could mention several instances. First, when I was a boy at school I was shown the hatchments in Wateringbury church, in Kent, by my master, and informed that Sir Thomas Styles had murdered some domestic, and was consequently obliged to bear the "bloody hand:" and lastly, and lately, at Church-Gresley, in Derbyshire, at the old hall of the Gresley family, I was shown the marble table on which Sir Roger or Sir Nigel Gresley had cut up, in a sort of Greenacre style, his cook; for which he was obliged to have the bloody hand in his arms, and put into the church on his tomb.
H. W. D.
Anticipations of Modern Ideas by Defoe (Vol. iii., p. 137.).—The two tracts mentioned by your correspondent R. D. H., and which he states he has often sought in vain, namely, Augusta Triumphans, London, 1728, 8vo., and Second Thoughts are best, London, 1729, 8vo., are to be found in the Selection from Defoe's Works published by Talboys in 20 vols. 12mo. in 1840. They are both indisputably by Defoe, and contain, as your correspondent observes, many anticipations of modern improvements. I may mention that there is a tract, also beyond doubt by Defoe, on the subject of London street-robberies, which has never yet been noticed or attributed to him by any one. It is far more curious and valuable than Second Thoughts are best, and is perfectly distinct from that tract. It gives a history, and the only one I ever yet met with, written in all Defoe's graphic manner, of the London police and the various modes of street robbery in the metropolis, from the time of Charles II. to 1731, and concludes by suggestions of effectual means of prevention. It is evidently the work of one who had lived in London during the whole of the period. The title is—
"An effectual Scheme for the immediate preventing of Street Robberies, and suppressing all other Disorders of the Night, with a brief History of the Night Houses, and an Appendix relating to those Sons of Hell called Incendiaries. Humbly inscribed to the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor of the City of London. London: Printed for J. Wilford, at the Three Flower de Luees, behind the Chapter House in St. Paul's Church Yard. 1731. (Price 1s.) 8vo., pages 72."
I have also another tract on the same subject, which has not been noticed by Defoe's biographers, but which I have no hesitation in ascribing to him. It is curious enough, but not of equal value with the last. The title is—
"Street Robberies considered. The reason of their being so frequent, with probable Means to prevent 'em. To which is added, three short Treatises: 1. A Warning for Travellers; with Rules to know a Highwayman and Instructions how to behave upon the occasion. 2. Observations on Housebreakers. How to prevent a Tenement from being broke open. With a Word of Advice concerning Servants. 3. A Caveat for Shopkeepers: with a Description of Shoplifts, how to know 'em, and how to prevent 'em: also a Caution of delivering Goods: with the Relation of several Cheats practised lately upon the Publick. Written by a converted Thief. To which is prefix'd some Memoirs of his Life. Set a Thief to catch a Thief. London: Printed for J. Roberts, in Warwick Lane. Price 1s. (No date, but circ. 1726.) 8vo., pages 72."
James Crossley.
Meaning of Waste-book (Vol. iii., p. 118.).—The waste-book in a counting-house is that in which all the transactions of the day, receipts, payments, &c., are entered miscellaneously as they occur, and of which no account is immediately taken, no value immediately found; whence, so to speak, the mass of affairs is undigested, and the wilderness or waste is uncultivated, and without result until entries are methodically made in the day-book and ledger; without which latter appliances there would, in book-keeping, be waste indeed, in the worst sense of the term. The word day-book explains itself. The word ledger is explained in Johnson's and in Ash's Dictionary, from the Dutch, as signifying a book that lies in the counting-house permanently in one place. The etymology there given also explains why certain lines used in fishing-tackle, by old Isaak Walton, and by his disciples at the present day, are called ledger-lines. It, however, does not seem to explain the phrase ledger-lines, used in music; namely, the term applied to those short lines added above or below the staff of five lines, when the notes run very high or very low, and which are exactly those which are not permanent. Here the French word léger tempts the etymologist a little.
Robert Snow.
Deus Justificatus (Vol. ii., p. 441.).—There is no doubt that this work was written by Henry Hallywell, and not by Cudworth. Dr. Worthington, whose intercourse with the latter was of the most intimate kind, and who would have been fully aware of the fact had he been the author, observes, in a letter not dated, but written circ. September, 1668, addressed to Dr. More, and of which I have a copy now before me:
"I bought at London Mr. Hallywell's Deus Justificatus. Methinks it is better written than his former Letter. He will write better and better."
In a short account of Hallywell, who was of the school of Cudworth and More, and whose MS. correspondence with the latter is now in my possession, in Wood's Fasti, vol. ii. p. 187. Edit. Bliss, Wood, "amongst several things that he hath published," enumerates five only, but does not give the Deus Justificatus amongst them. It appears (Wood's Athenæ, vol. iv. p. 230.) that he was ignorant who the author of this tract was.
It is somewhat singular that the mistake in ascribing Deus Justificatus to Cudworth should have been continued in Kippis's edition of the Biographia Britannica. It was so ascribed to him, first, as far as I can find, by a writer of the name of Fancourt, in the preface to his Free Agency of Accountable Creatures Examined, London, 1733, 8vo. On his authority it was included in the list of Cudworth's works in the General Dictionary, 1736, folio, vol. iv. p. 487., and in the Biographia Britannica, 1750, vol. iii. p. 1581., and in the last edition by Kippis. Birch, in the mean time, finding, no doubt, on inquiry, that there was no ground for ascribing it to Cudworth, made no mention of it in his accurate life prefixed to the edition of the Intellectual System in 1742.
Hallywell, the author, deserves to be better known. In many passages in his works he gives ample proof that he had fully imbibed the lofty Platonism and true Christian spirit of his great master.
James Crossley.
Touchstone's Dial (Vol. ii., p. 405.; Vol. iii., pp. 52. 107.).—I am gratified to find that my note on "Touchstone's Dial" has prompted Mr. Stephens to send you his valuable communication on these old-fashioned chronometers. The subjoined extract from Travels in America in the Year 1806, by Thomas Ashe, Esq., is interesting, as it shows that "Ring-dials" were used as common articles of barter in America at the commencement of the present century:—
"The storekeepers on the Alleghany River from above Pittsburg to New Orleans are obliged to keep every article which it is possible that the farmer and manufacturer may want. Each of their shops exhibits a complete medley: a magazine, where are to be had both a needle and an anchor, a tin pot and a large copper boiler, a child's whistle and a piano-forte, a ring-dial and a clock," &c.
J. M. B.
Ring Dials.—I was interested with the reference to Pocket Sun-dials in "Notes and Queries," pp. 52. 107. because it re-furnished an opportunity of placing in print a scrap of information on the subject, which I neglected to embrace when I first read Mr. Knight's note on the passage in Shakspeare. About seventy years ago these small, cheap, brass "Ring-dials" for the pocket were manufactured by the gross by a firm in Sheffield (Messrs. Proctor), then in Milk street. I well remember the workman—an old man in my boyhood—who had been employed in making them, as he said, "in basketsful;" and also his description of the modus operandi, which was curious enough. They were of different sizes and prices, and their extreme rarity at present, considering the number formerly in use, is only less surprising than the commonness of pocket-watches which have superseded them. I never saw but one of these cheapest and most nearly forgotten horologia, and which the old brass-turner, as I recollect, boasted of as "telling the time true to a quarter of an hour!"
D.
Sheffield, Jan. 2. 1851.
Cockade (Vol. iii., p. 7.).—The Query of A. E. has not yet been satisfactorily answered; nor can I pretend to satisfy him. But as a small contribution to the history of the decoration in question, I beg to offer him the following definition from the Dictionnaire étymologique of Roquefort, 8vo., Paris, 1829:—
"Cocarde, touffe de rubans que sous Louis XIII. on portoit sur le feutre, et qui imitoit la crête du coq."
If this be correct, Apodliktes (p. 42.) must be mistaken in attributing so recent an origin to the cockade as the date of the Hanoverian succession. The truth is, that from the earliest period of heraldic institutions, colours have been used to symbolise parties. The mode of wearing them may have varied; and whether wrought in silk, or more economically represented in the stamped leather cockade of our private soldier, is little to the purpose. It will, however, hardly be contended that our present fashion at all resembles "la crête du coq."
F. S. Q.
"The ribband worn in the hat" was styled "a favour" previous to the Scotch Covenanters' nick-naming it a cockade. Allow me to correct Apodliktes (p. 42.): "The black favour being the Hanoverian badge, the white favour that of the Stuarts." The knots or bunches of ribbons given as favours at marriages, &c., were not invariably worn in the hat as a cockade is, but it was sometimes (see Hudibras, Pt. i. canto ii. line 524.)
"Wore in their hats like wedding garters."
There is a note on this line in my edition, which is the same as J. B. Colman refers to for the note on the Frozen Horn (p. 91.).
Blowen.
Rudbeck's Atlantica—Grenville copy—Tomus I Sine Anno. 1675. 1679. (Vol. iii., p. 26.).—Has any one of these three copies a separate leaf, entitled "Ad Bibliopegos?"—Not one of them.
(Neither has the king's (George III.) copy, nor the Sloane copy, both in the Museum.)
Has the copy with the date 1679, "Testimonia" at the end?—The Testimonia are placed after the Dedication, before the text (they are inlaid). They occupy fifteen pages.
Have they a separate Title and a separate sheet of Errata?—Neither the one nor the other.
Is there a duplicate copy of this separate Title at the end of the Preface?—No.
(The copy with the date 1675 has at the end Testimonia filling eight pages, with a separate title, and a leaf containing three lines of Errata.)
Tomus II. 1689.—How many pages of Testimonia are there at the end of the Preface?—Thirty-eight pages.
(In George III.'s copy the Testimonia occupy forty-three pages.)
Is there in any one of these volumes the name of any former owner, any book number, or any other mark by which they can be recognised; for instance, that of the Duke de la Vallière?—No. Not in Mr. Grenville's, nor in George III.'s, nor in the Sloane's; this last has not the Third Volume.
Henry Foss.
Scandal against Queen Elizabeth (Vol. iii., p. 11.).—It is a tradition in a family with which I am connected, that Queen Elizabeth had a son, who was sent over to Ireland, and placed under the care of the Earl of Ormonde. The Earl, it will be remembered, was distantly related to the Queen, her great-grandmother being the daughter of Thomas, the eighth Earl.
Papers are said to exist in the family which prove the above statement.
J. Bs.
Private Memoirs of Queen Elizabeth.—The curious little volume mentioned by Mr. Roper (Vol. iii., p. 45.), is most probably the book alluded to by J. E. C., p. 23. I possess a copy of much later date (1767). It is worthy of note, that the narrative is headed The Earl of Essex; or, the Amours of Queen Elizabeth; while the title-page states, The secret History of the most Renown'd Q. Elizabeth and Earl of Essex.
I think it can scarcely be said to be corroborative of the "scandal" contained in Mr. Ives's MS. note, or that in Burton's Parliamentary Diary, cited by P. T., Vol. ii. p. 393. Whitaker, in his Vindication of Mary Q. of Scots, has displayed immense industry and research in his collection of charges against the private life of Elizabeth, but makes no mention of these reports.
E. B. Price.
Bibliographical Queries (No. 39.), Monarchia Solipsorum (Vol. iii., p. 138.).—Your correspondent asks, Can there be the smallest doubt that the veritable inventor of this satire upon the Jesuits was their former associate, Jules-Clement Scotti? Having paid considerable attention to the writings of Scotti, Inchofer, and Scioppius, and to the evidence as to the authorship of this work, I should, notwithstanding Niceron's authority, on which your correspondent seems to rely, venture to assert that the claim made for Scotti, as well as that for Scioppius, may be at once put aside. No two authors ever more carefully protected their literary offspring, numerous as they were, by the catalogues and lists of them which they published or dispersed from time to time, than these two writers. In them every tract is claimed, however short, which they had written. Scotti published one in 1650, five years after the publication of the Monarchia Solipsorum; and I have a letter of his, of the same period, containing a list of his writings. Scioppius left one, dated 1647, now in MS. in the Laurentian Library with his other MSS., and which carefully mentions every tract he had written against the Jesuits. The Monarchia Solipsorum does not appear in the lists of these two writers; and no good reason can be assigned why it should not, on the supposition of its being written by either of them. If not in those which were published, it certainly would not have been omitted in those communicated to their friends, not Jesuits, or which were found amongst their own MSS. Then, nothing can be more distinct than the style of Scotti, of Scioppius, and that of the author, whoever he was, of the Monarchia. The much-vexed spirit of the bitterest of critics would have been still more indignant if one or two of the passages in this work could ever, in his contemplation, have been imputed to his pen.