Vol. IV.—No. 109. NOTES AND QUERIES: A MEDIUM OF INTER-COMMUNICATION FOR LITERARY MEN, ARTISTS, ANTIQUARIES, GENEALOGISTS, ETC.

VOL. IV.—No. 109.

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 29. 1851.

Price Threepence. Stamped Edition, 4d.

CONTENTS.

NOTES:—

QUERIES:—

REPLIES:—

MISCELLANEOUS:—

Notes.

THOMAS MORE AND JOHN FISHER.

Although I am afraid "NOTES AND QUERIES" may not be considered as open to contributions purely bibliographical, and admitting I am uncertain whether the following copy of the treatise of John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, has been before noted, I am induced to send this extract from Techener's Bulletin du Bibliophile for May 1851. The book is in the library at Douai.

"This Treatise concernynge the fruytful Saynges of David the King and prophete in the seven penytencyall psalmes, devyded in ten sermons, was made and compyled by the ryght reverente fader in god Johan Fyssher, doctour of dyvinyte and bysshop of Rochester, at the exortacion and sterynge of the most excellent pryncesse Margarete, Countesse of Richemount and Derby, and moder to out souverayne Lorde Kynge Hēry the VII."

It is described as a small 4to., printed upon vellum, in Gothic letters, at London, 1508, by Wynkyn de Worde, and contains 146 leaves. On the first leaf it has a portcullis, crowned with the motto "Dieu et mon Droit." On the recto of the last leaf there is—

"Here endeth the exposycyon of the 7 psalmes. Enprynted at London in the fletestrete, at the sygne of ye Sonne, by Wynkyn de Worde. In the yere of oure lorde M.CCCCC.VIII. ye 16 day of ye moneth of Juyn. The XXIII. yere of ye reygne of our souverayne Lorde Kynge Hēry the Seventh."

At the back, there

is the sun, the monogram of Wynkyn de Worde—the letters W. C. displayed as usual—and beneath, "Wynkyn de Worde."

At the beginning of the book, "sur une garde en vélin" (a fly-leaf of vellum?), there is written in a very neat hand the following ten verses, the profession of faith of Thomas Morus and of his friend John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester:

Beneath—

And lower on the same page—

It is traditionally reported, upon the testimony of some Anglican Benedictines (an order now extinct), that the lines which contain the profession of faith, and those which follow, are in the handwriting of Bishop Fisher, and that the work was presented by him to the chancellor, during their imprisonment, when by order of Henry VIII. the chancellor was denied the consolation of his books.

In the same library there is a fine Psalter, which belonged to Queen Elizabeth. The Livre d'Heures of Mary Queen of Scots was here also to be found: "Maria, glorious martyr and Queen of Scotland." It is conjectured these books were brought to Douai by the fugitive English Roman Catholic priests. In 1790 their collections were confiscated and given to the public library of Douai. It would be of interest to ascertain, if possible, the authenticity of the Heures à l'Usage, stated to have belonged to Mary Queen of Scots. Upon this point one may be permitted to be sceptical. I have myself seen two. One of these, it was said, had been used by Mary on the scaffold, and contained a note in the handwriting, as I think, of James II. attesting the fact. It was understood to have been obtained from a monastery in France. The other, a small Prayer Book MS. in vellum, of good execution, had the signature "M." with a line I think over it of "O Lord, deliver me from my enemies!" in French. I am, however, now writing from memory, and, in the first case, of very many years.

Whether the line, "Maria, glorious martyr and Queen of Scotland," be written in the Psalter, or has been added by the mental excitement of M. Duthillœul, the librarian at Douai, I cannot decide. The grand culmination of "and Queen of Scotland" forms doubtless a very striking anti-thesis: but neither the possessor of the book nor a priest would have so sunk the martyr, although a woman and a queen were alike concerned, as this line does. Lowndes states there is a copy of the bishop's treatise on vellum at Cambridge. A copy is in the British Museum; but the title, according, to Lowndes, has seven sermons. It will be observed the title now given has ten.

S. H.

NOTES ON NEWSPAPERS.

The social elements of society in the seventeenth century were more simple in their character and development than at the present period. The population was comparatively small, and therefore the strivings for success in any pursuit did not involve that severe conflict which is so frequently the case in the present day. Society then was more of a community than it is now. It had not public bodies to aid it. It was left more to its own inherent resources for reciprocal good, and for mutual help. The temptations to evade and dissemble, in matters of business, or private and public negotiations, were not so strong as they now are. Its transactions were more transparent and defined, because they were fewer and less complicated than many of our own. We readily grant that society now, in its social, religious, and commercial aspects, enjoys advantages immeasurably superior to those of any former period; still there are some few advantages which it had then, that it cannot possess now. The following advertisements, from the newspapers of the time, will illustrate the truth of the foregoing remarks:

From a Collection for Improvement of Husbandry and Trade.

Friday, January 26, 1693/4.

"One that is fit to keep a Warehouse, be a Steward, or do any Business that can be supposed an intelligent Man that has been a Shopkeeper is fit for, and can give any Security that can be desired, as far as Ten Thousand Pound goes, and has some Estate of his own, desires an Employment of One hundred Pounds a year, or upwards. I can give an account of him."

That a man having 10,000l. to give as security, and in possession of an estate, should require a situation of 100l. per annum, sounds oddly enough in our ears. "I can give an account of him," denotes that the editor was a man well known and duly appreciated. He appears to have been a scribe useful in many ways. He was known, and knowing.

Friday, February 2, 1693/4.

"A very eminent Brewer, and one I know to be a very honest Gentleman, wants an Apprentice. I can give an account of him."

In what sense the word "honest" must here be taken it is difficult to define. As an eminent brewer, we should naturally conclude he must have been an honest man. He is here very eminent and very honest.

Friday March 16, 1693/4.

"Many Masters want Apprentices, and many Youths want Masters. If they apply themselves to me, I'll strive to help them. Also for variety of valuable services."

Here is the editor of a paper offering his help to masters and apprentices for their mutual good. Let us suppose an advertisement of this kind appearing in The Times of our own day. Printing-house Square would not contain a tithe of the individuals who would present themselves for the reception of this accommodating aid. In such a case the editors (as it regards their particular duties) would be cyphers, for a continuous absorption of their time would necessarily occur in the carrying out of this benevolent offer. This advertisement may be considered as multum in parvo, giving the wants of the many in an announcement of three or four lines, connecting them with a variety of services which in those days were thought to be valuable. How greatly are we assisted by these little incidents in forming correct views of the state of society at that period.

The next advertisement shows the value set upon the services of one who was to perform the duties of a clerk, and to play well on the violin.

"If any young Man that plays well on a Violin, and writes a good Hand, desires a Clerkship, I can help him to Twenty Pounds a year."

Of course twenty pounds was of more value then than it is now: still it seems a small sum for the performance of such duties, for twelve months. Here is musical talent required for the amusement of others, in combination with the daily duties of a particular profession. An efficient musician, and a good writer, and all for 20l. per annum! We learn by the editor's "I can help him," his readiness to assist all who would advertise in his journal, to obtain those employments which their advertisements specified.

Friday, April 6, 1694.

"A Grocer of good business desires an Apprentice of good growth."

The "good growth" must have been intended to convey the idea of height and

strength.

My next article shall be devoted to advertisements of another class, further illustrating the state of society and the peculiarities of the people at the end of the seventeenth century.

H. M. BEALBY.

North Brixton.

TREATISE OF EQUIVOCATION.

As having originated the inquiry in "NOTES AND QUERIES"[1] respecting this Treatise, under the signature of J. M., I feel great obligation both to the editor of that journal, and the editor of the Treatise itself, for having brought it to light by publication, and added it to the stock of accurate and very important historical information. Indeed, a real vacancy was left for it; and it is a subject of high self-gratulation, that a boon previously, and for a length of time, hidden and unproductive, is now accessible and operative without limit. I have no doubt that all your readers, and the whole reading public, join with me in rejoicing that the editorship of the work has fallen into hands so competent and so successful.

[1] Vol. i., pp. 263. 357.; Vol. ii., pp. 136. 168. 446. 490.

I was, not for ten, but twenty years or more, in quest of the MS. now so happily made public property, and should have fallen upon it much earlier, but for the misleading title under which it appears, where it is really; for it has been found. In the Catalogus Lib. MSS.: Ox. 1697, among the Laudian MSS. appears, p. 62., "968.95. A Treatise against Equivocation, or fraudulent Dissimulation." Against! when no such word is in the original, and the real matter and meaning is for! I had, at some early time, marked the very entry; but presuming that the work had been actually printed (which I believe it was in a very few copies, which have disappeared), naturally enough I did not pursue the search in that direction. Others, I am happy, have, and I am gratified.

The work is very important; for there is not a work more evidently genuine and authentic than this is proved to be by plain historic evidence, both as to the document itself and the facts which it attests. The witness, or witnesses, appearing in it, give their testimony respecting themselves with the most unsuspectable simplicity. They meant not, and have not, misrepresented themselves: they have proclaimed their own doctrine for themselves respecting Equivocation and Mental Reservation—the last of which is really of most importance; and it was most needful to the Roman body at the time, and under their circumstances. Their object, for mere safety, was concealment as to their resorts or residences. They could not exist, as they did, without the assistance and knowledge of many individuals, some of inferior class. Against the incessant inquiries to which they were exposed they had no defence, except the power of disappointing or misleading by ambiguity or deception, which was completely secured by reserved termination in the mind to any uttered declaration. Now, there is in this very Treatise plain admission that all the co-religionists of the endangered party, particularly a lady who is distinctly noticed, were not convinced of the moral rectitude of such a procedure; and it was necessary, or expedient, that their hesitation should be removed. And this seems to be the main object of the present work. How far it has succeeded must depend upon the evidence which is adduced.

We have generally had the doctrine of the Roman body on the subject of the Treatise presented by opponents; here we have it as deliberately stated by themselves. There is a passage rather observable in p. 103., beginning at the bottom and extending to the words "he hath no such meaning to tell them," of which we are not acquainted with a duplicate. But the whole has something of the freshness and interest of novelty.

Macbeth, it is agreed, I believe, was written in 1607, consequently after the Powder Plot, when the doctrine before us was brought forward pointedly against the traitors. Might there not be some reference to the fact in the Second Act, where the porter of the castle, roused by repeated knockings, on the murder, after other exclamations in the manner of the poet, proceeds:

"Here's an Equivocator, that could swear in both the scales, against either scale: who committed treason enough for God's sake, yet could not equivocate to heaven. Oh, come in, Equivocator"?

Mr. Jardine will thank your correspondent for pointing out an error or two which should be corrected in another edition. At p. 44., for "χθο," in the margin, should be printed "sub verbo." The word in the MS. is a contraction to that effect: the capital "V" has a curved stroke across the first line of the "V," followed by "bo." Generally the Dubium, in alphabetic works of the kind referred to, ranks under some alphabetic word, one or more, as it may happen; but in Em. Sà's work the word Dubium comes under the letter D., and this is meant to be expressed. At p. 49. the footnote should be omitted, as the Vulgate, which is followed, calls the 1st of Samuel the 1st of Kings. The first line of p. 56. should have "autem" instead of "antea." I have inspected the MS. carefully, and therefore speak with confidence.

EUPATOR.

NOTES ON VIRGIL.
(Continued from p. 308.)

"Infixit. Inflixit, lectionem quorundam MSS. facile prætulissem, et quod statim præcesserit transfixo, unde evadit inconcinna cognatæ dictionis repetitio, et quod etiam Æn. x. 303.:

"si Sidon. Apoll. v. 197. haud tueretur vulgatam scripturam:

To which criticism of Wakefields's, Forbiger adds: "Præterea etiam acuto scopulo infigendi voc. accommodatius videtur quam infligendi." And Wagner: "acuto scopulo infigi melius."

This interpretation and these criticisms are founded altogether on a false conception of the meaning of the word infigere, which is never to fix on, but always either to fix in, or to fix with, i.e. pierce with. Scopulo infixit acuto, fixed or pinned down or to the ground with a sharp rock; i.e. hurled a sharp-pointed rock on him, so as to nail him to the ground. So (Æn.

lowercase">XII. 721.) "Cornua obnixi infigunt," fix their horns, not on, but in; infix their horns; stick their horns into each other; stick each other with their horns: q.d. Cornibus se mutuo infigunt: and, exactly parallel to our text:

In confirmation of this view of the passage, I may observe: 1st, that it is easier to imagine a man staked to the ground by a sharp-pointed rock, than flung on a sharp-pointed rock, so as to remain permanently impaled on it; and 2dly, that the account given of the transaction, both by Quintus Calaber and Seneca, agree as perfectly with this view as they disagree with the opposite:

And so Seneca; who, having presented us with Ajax clinging to the rock to which he had swum for safety, after his ship had been sunk, and himself struck with lightning, and there uttering violent imprecations against the Deity, adds:

And, so also, beyond doubt, we are to understand Sidonius Apollinaris's—

Not, with Wakefield and the other commentators, fixed on the rocks of Caphareus, but, pierced with the rocks of Caphareus, and lying under them. Compare (Æn. IX. 701.) "fixo pulmone," the pierced lung; "fixo cerebro" (Æn. XII. 537.); "verubus trementia figunt" (Æn. I. 216.), not, fix on the spits, but, stick or pierce with the spits; and especially (Ovid. Ibis. 341.),

pierced and pinned down with a rock, at the bottom of the Eubœan gulf.

TURBINE. SCOPULO.—Not two instruments, a whirlwind and a rock, but one single instrument, a whirling rock; scopulo turbineo; in modo turbinis se circumagente; as if Virgil had said, Solo affixit illum correptum et transverberatum scopulo acuto in eum maxima vi rotato: or, more briefly, Turbine scopuli acuti corripuit et infixit. Compare:

So understood, 1st, the passage is according to Virgil's usual manner, the latter part of the line explaining and defining the general statement contained in the former; and, 2ndly, Pallas kills her enemy, not by the somewhat roundabout and unusual method of first striking him with thunder, and then snatching him up in a whirlwind, and then either dashing him against a sharp rock, and leaving him impaled there, or, as I have shown is undoubtedly the meaning, impaling him with a sharp rock, but by the more compendious and less out-of-the-way method of first striking him with thunder, and then whirling a sharp-pointed rock on top of him, so as to impale him.

From Milton's imitation of this passage, in his Paradise Lost (ii. 180.), it appears that even he fell into the general and double error:

Caro's translation shows that he had no definite idea whatever of the meaning:

---

"'INCEDERE' wird besonders von der feierlichen, würdevollen Haltung im Gange gebraucht: vers 500, von der Dido, 'Regina incessit.' (Ruhnk. zu Terent. And. I. i. 100. Eun. v. 3. 9.) Deshalb der majestätischen Juno eigenthümlich, Ἡραῖον βαδίζειν. Also nicht für sum, sondern ganz eigentlich."—Thiel.

And so also Holdsworth and Ruæus.

I think, on the contrary, that incedo, both here and elsewhere, expresses only the stepping or walking motion generally, and that the character of the step or walk, if inferable at all, is to be inferred only from the context. Accordingly, "Magnifice incedit" (Liv. II. 6.); "Turpe incedere" (Catull. XXXXII. 8.);

"Molliter incedit" (Ovid, Amor. II. 23.); "Passu incedit inerti" (Ovid, Metam. II. 772.); "Melius est incessu regem quam imperium regno claudicare" (Justin. VI. ii. 6.); "Incessus omnibus animalibus certus et uniusmodi, et in suo, cuique, genere" (Plin. X. 38.).

The emphasis, therefore, is on regina, and the meaning is, I who step, or walk, QUEEN of the Gods; the dignity of the step being not expressed by "incedo," but inferable from "regina." The expression corresponds exactly to "ibit regina" (Æn. II. 578.); with this difference only, that "ibit" does not, like "incedo," specify motion on foot.

"Jovisque et soror et conjux."—Both the ets are emphatic. "Jovisque et soror et conjux."

"Bella" expresses the organised resistance which she meets, and the uncertainty of the issue; and being placed first word in the line is emphatic.

JAMES HENRY.

Minor Notes.

Verses presented to General Monck.

—The subjoined notice of a curious entry in the records of the Belfast corporation may be acceptable. The author is unknown. They are inscribed, "Verses to General Monck," and, as the last six lines show, are an attack on the Rump Parliament:—

The occasion of their presentation is unknown. General Monck took Belfast in 1646 from the Scotch, who being true Presbyterians of the older school, had turned against the parliament. This was the probable occasion of their being presented to the future restorer of King Charles II.

E. L. B.

Justice to Pope Pius V.

—You have done yourself credit by exonerating Queen Elizabeth from a charge the easiest to bring, and the most difficult to rebut, implying the proof of a negative; and therefore frequently brought by the unprincipled. I propose, as a counterpart, to exonerate Pope Pius V. from an imputation, mistakingly, though unjustly, cast upon him by an authority of no less weight than that of Sir Walter Scott. In his edition of Somers's Tracts, vol. i. p. 192., occurs a note on a place in the execution of justice: "Pius V. resolved to make his bastard son, Boncompagni, Marquis of Vincola, King of Ireland," &c. For this assertion no authority is cited, nor indeed could be. The very name might have suggested the filiation to his successor, Gregory XIII., which was the fact. In a work, not much known, The Burnt Child dreads the Fire, &c., by William Denton, M.D., London, 1675, at p. 25. we read, "Gregory XIII. had a bastard, James Buon Compagna, and to him he gave Ireland, and impowered Stewkely with men, arms, and money, to conquer it for him."[2] There is no reason to doubt, that with the editor of the Tracts the above imputation was a simple mistake; but it is an important duty of all who interfere with historical literature, to state and correct every discovered instance of the kind.

[2] Camden, in his Elizabeth, under 1578, states the fact without mention of the name, only calling him "the pope's bastard;" but the date is the sixth year of the pontificate of Gregory XIII.

EUPATOR.

Queries.

CROSSES AND CRUCIFIXES.

In the 22nd volume of the Archæologia, p. 58., is the following passage:

"The cross, which does not appear to have been peculiar to Christianity, when introduced on these obelisks, is usually filled with tracery."

The obelisks, or stones of memorial, referred to are the subjects of a very interesting paper communicated by Mr. Logan to the Society of Antiquaries. (See Plates 2, 3, 4, and 5.) I am desirous of being informed what authenticated instances there are of crosses, or stones marked with crosses, being used for landmarks, memorials, or for any other purpose, civil or religious, before the introduction of Christianity? I have met with one instance. Prescott, in his History of Mexico, relates that—

"In the court of one of the temples in the island of Columel he was amazed by the sight of a cross of stone and lime, about ten palms high."

It was the emblem of the god of rain (See vol. i. p. 240., &c.)

In the same paper Mr. Logan observes—

"Crosses, or stones on which the figure was traced, marked a place of meeting for certain districts; and within memory of man a fair was held on this spot. It is not improbable that market-crosses may be deduced from this custom."

It seems that every town that had the privilege of a market or fair (I am speaking of England) had a market-cross. In most of these towns the cross has disappeared, and in its place a ball or globe has been mounted on the shaft; but the term "market-cross" is still in use. In the town of Giggleswick, in the parish of Giggleswick, there is a perfect market-cross, the cross being what is, I believe, called a cross-fleury. In the town of Settle, in the same parish of Giggleswick, the ball or globe is placed on the top of the shaft. Are there other instances of market towns in which the cross is still found?

I passed through a market town lately in which the stone steps, and socket in which the shaft was placed, are preserved; but they have been removed to one corner of the market-place. The shaft and cross have disappeared.

Is not this erection of the cross, in places in which markets and fairs were held, of ecclesiastical origin? Was the cross erected by licence granted by the bishop within whose jurisdiction it was placed? Is there any grant of such licence in existence? Or did these crosses originate in the gratuitous piety of our ancestors? I fear to ask the question, whether the buyers and sellers under the cross are more upright in their dealings than those who buy and sell without the presence of this emblem of all that is true and just. Is the cross erected in the cities and towns of other states, as in England? Was the custom general in Europe?

F. W. J.

Mr. Curzon states, in the introduction to his Monasteries of the Levant, that—

"The crucifix was not known before the fifth or sixth century, though the cross was always the emblem of the Christian faith."

I am persuaded that this assertion is incorrect, and that the crucifix was used in much earlier times. Will some one kindly inform me where the first mention of

it is to be found, and what is the date of the earliest examples now known?

DRYASDUST.

MASTER OF THE BUCKHOUNDS.

In reading the Topographer for January 1791 (a work which was published under the editorship of my uncle, Sir Egerton Brydges), I was surprised to find, in an account of the family of Brocas, of Beaurepaire, in the county of Hampshire, that the post of Master of the Buckhounds had been sold in the reign of James I.

Mr. Gough (Sepulchral Monuments, pp. 160, 161.) appears to be the authority quoted who describes the monument of Sir Bernard Brocas, Kt., as existing at Westminster, and having on it an inscription in which is the following sentence:

"Sir Bernard succeeded to the paternal inheritance both in England and France, and having married Mary, daughter and heiress of Sir John de Roche, had a large estate with her, and the hereditary post of Master of the Buckhounds; which was confirmed to him by King Edward the Third, and held by the family, till sold in James the First's reign."

I have no means of ascertaining at the present time whether this monument is still in existence or not; nor indeed has that much to do with the object of my writing, which is to suggest the following Queries, in the hope that some of your correspondents may be able to send satisfactory answers.

1. By whom was the post of Master of the Buckhounds first instituted, and who was the first Master?

2. Is there any list of persons holding this office; and if so, where may it be seen?

3. Is there any instance of an unmarried lady having held it: for in the case before us we see that a lady was able to convey it by inheritance to her husband?

4. By whom was it sold? Was it by the last hereditary possessor; and if so, what was his name? Or was it by the king, on the death of one of the possessors, for the purpose of enriching himself?

5. Is it known whether there is any other instance of its having been sold: and when did it come to be, as now, a ministerial office?

JOHN BRANFILL HARRISON.

Maidstone.

Minor Queries.

300. "No Cross no Crown."

—Where did Penn get the title of his well-known work? St. Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, in allusion to the custom of crowning crosses, has these lines:—