common, and the pamphlets and sermons of that time on original sin are innumerable, many Taylors may have written besides the one mentioned by Ἁλιεύς. J. T.'s Taylor cannot be excused even on the ground of having read only a part of the book he misrepresented: for he refers to p. 68., from which he must have seen that Thomas Whiston there explained only an isolated passage.

H. B. C.

Garrick Club.

HELMETS.

(Vol. viii., p. 538.)

The following observations upon the helmet, by Stephen Martin Leake, Esq., Garter, may be acceptable to your querist S. N.

"The helmet, called galea by the Greeks, cassis by the Romans, is called helm (which signifies the head) by the Germans; whence the French heaume, and our helmet. It is of great account with the Germans: the helm and crest deriving their use from tournaments, whence arms took their origin; and this being with them the most essential mark of noblesse, neither the Germans nor French allow a new made gentleman to bear a helmet, but only a wreath of his colours; and when he is a gentleman of three descents, to bear a helmet with three barrs for his three descents (Menestrier, Abrégé méthodique des Armoiries, 1672, p. 28.; Origine des Ornemens des Armoiries, p. 2.). Tymbre is the general word used for the casque or helm by the French. Menestrier, in his Origine des Ornemens des Armoiries, p. 13., says the modern heralds observe three things with regard to the tymbre: the matter, the form, and the situation. That kings should have their helmets of gold open, and in full front; princes and lords of silver, and somewhat turned with a certain number of barrs, according to their degree; gentlemen to have their helmets of steel, and in profile. Colombiere assigns a knight a helmet bordered with silver, barons with gold, counts and viscounts the like, and the barrs gold; marquisses the helm same, and damasked with gold; dukes and princes the gold helmet, damasked. And as to the barrs, new gentlemen without any; gentlemen of three descents, three barrs; knights and ancient gentlemen, five; barons seven; counts and viscounts nine; marquisses eleven. But Moreau, who first propagated these inventions (Origine des Ornemens des Armoiries, p. 17.), assigns to an emperor or king eleven, a prince or duke nine, a marquis and count seven, a baron five: whence it seems there is no

certain rule or uniform practice observed herein, unless in the situation of the helmet, wherein both the Germans and French account it more noble to bear an open helmet than a close one; but these are novel distinctions. Anciently, the helmets were all turned to the right, and close; and it is but some years since, says Menestrier (Abrégé Méthodique, 1672, p. 28.), that they began to observe the number of grilles or barrs, to distinguish the different degrees. But however ingenious these inventions are, it is certain that they are useless (as gold and silver helmets would be) because every rank of nobility is distinguished by the coronet proper to his degree. Whatever honour may be attributed to the helmet, the use of it with the arms is but modern; and upon the coins of kings and sovereign princes, where they are chiefly to be met with, the helmets are barred, and either full or in profile, as best suited the occasion; and upon the Garter plates of Christian Duke of Brunswick (1625), Gustavus Adolphus King of Sweden (1628), and Charles Count Palatine of the Rhine (1633 and 1680), they are full fronted with seven barrs.

"In Great Britain we have but four kinds of helmets, according to the four different degrees in the state—the king, the nobility, knights, and gentry. The sovereign helmet full fronted, having seven barrs or guards, visure without any bever; the nobilities the same, but half turned to the right, and usually showing four barrs; the knight's helmet full fronted, with the bever turned up; and the gentleman's in profile, the bever or visor close; using steel helmets for all as the only proper metal for a helmet common to all. Foreigners condemn us for attributing that helmet to a knight, which they give to a king; and more proper, says Mackensie, for a king without guard-visure than for a knight (Science of Heraldry, p. 87.), because knights are in danger, and have less need to command. But it must be observed, the knight's helmet has a visor, and no barrs; the sovereign's barrs, because no visor. And this kind of helmet, with barrs instead of a visor, seems to have been contrived for princes and great commanders, who would have been incommoded by the visor, and too much exposed without anything, therefore had barrs: whereas knights being, according to Mackensie, in more danger and having less need to command, had their helmet for action; and are represented with the bever up, ready to receive the king or general's command. As to the resemblance of the one to the other, both being in full front, the connexion was not anciently so remote as seems at this day. Knighthood is the first and most ancient military honour, and therefore at this day sovereign princes and knights are the only two honours universally acknowledged. Knighthood is the source of all honours, and of all military glory, and an honour esteemed by and conferred upon kings; without which they were heretofore thought incomplete, and could not confer that honour on others, no more than ordination could be conferred by one unordained: so that there was a very near connexion between sovereignty and knighthood. And besides, the propriety of the open helmet with a visor for a knight, and the helmet guard-visure for a king, the latter is more ornamental, especially if, according to the modern practice, the barrs are gold. As the king's helmet is without a visor, and barred, so is that of the nobility in imitation of it, but turned to the right as a proper distinction as, in like manner, that of the gentry differs from the knights. As there are in fact but two orders of men, nobility of which the king is the first degree, and gentry of which knights are the first, so they are by this means sufficiently distinguished according to their respective orders and degrees: the first order distinguished by the barred helmet, the gentry by the visored helmet with proper differences of the second degrees of each class from the first; and all other distinctions more than this are unnecessary and useless.

"The helmet does not seem to have been formerly used but in a military way, and affairs of chivalry. I do not find any helmets upon the monuments of our Kings of England, nor upon other ancient monuments, nor upon any of the Great Seals, coins, or medals. Upon the plates of the Knights of the Garter at Windsor, all degrees used the old profile close helmet till about 1588, some few excepted; and soon after, the helmet with barrs came into fashion, and was used for all degrees of nobility, and it has continued ever since; and the same has been used for all degrees of nobility upon the plates of the Knights of the Bath, those that are knights only using a knight's helmet. And the same may be observed in Sir Edward Walker's Books of the Nobility from the Restoration to the Revolution, wherein all degrees have the helmet turned towards the right, showing four barrs; the sovereign's being full with seven barrs."

G.

HAMPDEN'S DEATH.

(Vol. viii., p. 495.)

"On the 21st of July, 1828, the corpse of John Hampden was disinterred by the late Lord Nugent for the purpose of settling the disputed point of history as to the manner in which the patriot received his death-wound. The examination seems to have been conducted after a somewhat bungling fashion for a scientific