daughter of Lord Burghley, Massinger, the poet's father, was the confidential agent employed between the parties. My purpose at present is to advert to a matter which occurred ten years earlier, and to which the note I am about to transcribe relates. It appears that in March, 1587, Arthur Massinger was a suitor for the reversion of the office of Examiner in the Court of the Marches toward South Wales, for which also a person of the name of Fox was a candidate; and, in order to forward the wishes of his dependent, the Earl of Pembroke wrote to Lord Burghley as follows:—

"My servant Massinger hathe besought me to ayde him in obteyning a reversion from her Majestie of the Examiner's office in this courte; whereunto, as I willingly have yielded, soe I resolved to leave the craving of your Lordship's furtheraunce to his owne humble sute; but because I heare a sonn of Mr. Fox (her Majestie's Secretary here) doth make sute for the same, and for the Mr. Sherar, who now enjoyethe it, is sicklie, I am boulde to desier your Lordship's honorable favour to my servaunte, which I shall most kindlie accepte, and he for the same ever rest bounde to praye for your Lordship. And thus, leaving further to trouble you, &c. 28. March, 1587. H. PEMBROKE."

The whole body of this communication, it is worth remark, is in the handwriting of Arthur Massinger (whose penmanship was not unlike that of his son), and the signature only that of the Earl, in whose family he was entertained. I have not been able to ascertain whether the application was successful; and it is possible that some of the records of the court may exist, showing either the death of Sherar, and by whom he was succeeded about that date, or that Sherar recovered from his illness. As I have before said, it is quite clear that Arthur Massinger was high in the confidence and service of Lord Pembroke ten years after the date of the preceding note.

I have a good deal more to say about Arthur Massinger, but I must take another time for the purpose.

THE HERMIT OF HOLYPORT.

TOUCHSTONE'S DIAL.

(Vol. ii., p. 405.)

The conjecture of Mr. Knight, in his note to As You Like It, and to which your correspondent J.M.B. has so instructively drawn our attention, is undoubtedly correct. The "sun-ring" or ring-dial, was probably the watch of our forefathers some thousand years previous to the invention of the modern chronometer, and its history is deserving of more attention than has hitherto been paid to it. Its immense antiquity in Europe is proved by its still existing in the remotest and least civilised districts of North England, Scotland, and the Western Isles, Ireland, and in Scandinavia. I have in my possession two such rings, both of brass. The one, nearly half an inch broad, and two inches in diameter, is from the Swedish island of Gothland, and is of more modern make. It is held by the finger and thumb clasping a small brass ear or handle, to the right of which a slit in the ring extends nearly one-third of the whole length. A small narrow band of brass (about one-fifth of the width) runs along the centre of the ring, and of course covers the slit. This narrow band is movable, and has a hole in one part through which the rays of the sun can fall. On each side of the band (to the right of the handle) letters, which stand for the names of the months, are inscribed on the ring as follows:—

Inside the ring, opposite to these letters, are the following figures for the hours:—

The small brass band was made movable that the ring-click might be properly set by the sun at stated periods, perhaps once a month.

The second sun-ring, which I bought in Stockholm in 1847, also "out of a deal of old iron," is

smaller and much broader than the first, and is perhaps a hundred years older; it is also more ornamented. Otherwise its fashion is the same, the only difference being in the arrangement of the inside figures, which are as follows:—

The ring recovered by Mr. Knight evidently agrees with the above. I hope Mr. K. will, sooner or later, present the curiosity to our national museum,—which will be driven at last, if not by higher motives, by the mere force of public opinion and public indignation, to form a regularly arranged and grand collection of our own British antiquities in every branch, secular and religious, from the earliest times, down through the middle ages, to nearly our own days. Such an archæological department could count not only upon the assistance of the state, but upon rich and generous contributions from British sources, individuals and private societies, at home and abroad, as well as foreign help, at least in the way of exchange. But any such plan must be speedily and well organised and well announced!

I give the above details, not only because they relate to a passage in our immortal bard, who has ennobled and perpetuated every word and fact in his writings, but because they illustrate the astronomical antiquities of our own country and our kindred tribes during many centuries. These sun-dials are now very scarce, even in the high Scandinavian North, driven out as they have been by the watch, in the same manner as the ancient clog^[1] or Rune-staff (the carved wooden perpetual almanac) has been extirpated by the printed calendar, and now only exists in the cabinets of the curious. In fifty years more sun-rings will probably be quite extinct throughout Europe. I hope this will cause you to excuse my prolixity. Will no astronomer among your readers direct his attention to this subject? Does anything of the kind still linger in the East?

GEORGE STEPHENS.

Stockholm.

DISCREPANCIES IN DUGDALE'S ACCOUNT OF SIR RALPH DE COBHAM.

There are some difficulties in Dugdale's account of the Cobham family which it may be well to bring before your readers; especially as several other historians and genealogists have repeated Dugdale's account without remarking on its inconsistencies. In speaking of a junior branch of the family, he says, in vol. ii. p. 69., "There was also Ralphe de Cobham, brother of the first-mentioned Stephen." He only mentions one Stephen but names him twice, first at page 66., and again at 69. Perhaps he meant the above-mentioned Stephen. He continues:—

"This Ralphe took to wife Mary Countess of Norfolk, widdow of Thomas of Brotherton. Which Mary was Daughter to William Lord Ros, and first married to William Lord Braose of Brembre; and by her had Issue John, who 20 E. III., making proof of his age, and doing his Fealty, had Livery of his lands."

At page 64. of the same volume he states that Thomas de Brotherton died in 12 Edward III., which would be only eight years before his widow's son,