Notes and Queries, Number 214, December 3, 1853

No. 166., "George III. reviewing the 10th Light Dragoons, commanded by the Prince of Wales." This picture was considered the chef d'œuvre of Sir William Beechey, and was painted in 1798; and it has been supposed the likeness of the Duke of York was the best taken of that Prince. Could any reader inform me on what day this review took place?1

When one sees a picture of Shakspeare, No. 276., and more especially in the palace of his cotemporary sovereigns, one is naturally led to inquire into its authenticity. I am therefore desirous to obtain some information relative to it.

In "N. & Q.," vol. vi., p. 197., you had several correspondents inquiring concerning the custom of royalty dining in public: perhaps it may interest them to know that there are two very attractive pictures of this ceremony in this collection, numbered 293 and 294: the first is of Charles I. and Henrietta Maria; the other Frederick V., Count Palatine and King of Bohemia, who married Elizabeth, daughter of James I. These two pictures are by Van Bassen, of whom, perhaps, some correspondent may be enabled to give an account.

Φ.

Richmond, Surrey.

Minor Queries

Helmets.—What is the antiquity of the practice of placing helmets over the shields of armorial bearings; and what are the varieties of helmets in regard to the rank or degree of persons?

S. N.

The Nursrow.—What is the origin of the word Nursrow, a name applied by Plott, in his History of Staffordshire, to the shrew mouse, and by the common people in Cheshire at the present day to the field-mouse; or rather, perhaps, indiscriminately to field and shrew mice?

N. R.

City Bellmen.—When were city bellmen first established? By whom appointed? What were their duties? What and how were they paid? What have been their employment and duties down to the present day?

Crito.

Pope's Elegy on an Unfortunate Lady.—In the new editions of Pope's Works, in course of publication, edited by Mr. Carruthers, Inverness, it is conjectured that the poet threw "ideal circumstances" into his most pathetic and melodious elegy, and "when he came to publish his letters, put wrong initials, as in other instances, to conceal the real names" (Pope's Poet. Works, Ingram, Cook, and Co., vol. ii. p. 184.). The initials are Mrs. W., niece of Lady A. I have always thought that a clue might be obtained to the name of this lady, by following up the hints in Pope's printed correspondence. Mrs. or Miss W. is mentioned or alluded to by Craggs and Pope, in connexion with the characters in the Rape of the Lock. One suggests the other. Inquiry should be directed to the families of Fernor of Tusmore, Lord Petre, and Sir George Brown. But I have heard a tradition in a Catholic family in the north of England that the lady was a Blount; probably one of the Blounts of Soddington, or of some one of the numerous branches of that ancient family.

An Inquirer.

"Too wise to err, too good to be unkind."—In what author may this passage be found?

"Too wise to err, too good to be unkind."E. P. H.

Clapham.

Passage in the "Christian Year."—In the beautiful lines on Confirmation in this work, the following verse occurs:

"Steady and pure as stars that beamIn middle heaven, all mist above,Seen deepest in the frozen stream:—Such is their high courageous love."

I should be grateful for an explanation of the third line.

A. A. D.

David's Mother.—I used to think it was impossible to ascertain from the Old Testament the name of David's mother. In the Genealogies recorded in the Sacred Scriptures, by J. S. (usually assumed to stand for John Speed, the historian and geographer), the name of the Psalmist's mother is given "Nahash." Can this be made out satisfactorily? Will the text 2 Sam. xvii. 25., as compared with 1 Chron. ii. 15., warrant it?

Y. B. N. J.

Emblems.—Can any of your readers inform me what are the emblematic meanings of the different precious stones, or of any of them? or in what work I shall find them described?

N. D.

"Kaminagadeyathooroosoomokanoogonagira."—In an appeal to the Privy Council from Madras, the above unparalleled long word occurs as the descriptions of an estate. I believe that its extreme length and unpronounceable appearance is without an equal. Can any of your readers acquainted with Indian literature translate it? if so, it would greatly oblige

F. J. G.

"Quid facies," &c.—I have lately met with the following curious play on words in an old MS. book. Can any of your correspondents give any account of it?

"Quid facies, facies Veneris si veneris ante?Ne pereas, per eas; ne sedeas, sed eas!"Balliolensis.

Will of Peter the Great.—M. Lamartinière, in a French pamphlet on the Eastern question, gives a document in several articles containing advice with respect to the policy of his successors on the throne of Russia, in which he advises her to make great advances in the direction of Constantinople, India, &c., and advocates the partition of Poland. Upon what authority does this document rest? and who is M. Lamartinière?

R. J. Allen.

H. Neele, Editor of Shakspeare.—In the preface to Lectures on English Poetry, being the Remains of the late Henry Neele (Lond. 1830), mention is made of a new edition of Shakspeare's dramatic works, "under the superintendence of Mr. Neele as editor, for which his enthusiastic reverence for the poet of 'all time' peculiarly fitted him, but which, from the want of patronage, terminated after the publication of a very few numbers." These very few numbers must have appeared about 1824-1827; yet the answer to my repeated inquiries after them in London is always "We cannot hear of them." Can any one give me farther information?—From the Navorscher.

J. M.

MS. by Rubens on Painting.—May I inquire of M. Philarète Chasles whether he ever saw or heard of a manuscript said to be written in Latin by Rubens, and existing in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris? One or two fragments have occasionally been quoted: I think one may be found in Sir Joshua Reynolds' Discourses, and the same is used by Burnet in his work on painting; but no authority is given as to the source of the information.2

If such a work can be found, it would confer a great boon upon the profession of the fine arts, if it were brought to light without delay.

Weld Taylor.

Peter Allan.—Will some correspondent of "N. & Q." afford information as to the exact date and place of birth of the celebrated Peter Allan, whose cave at Sunderland is regarded as one of the principal curiosities of the north of England? What is known of his general history; and is any member of his family now living?

E. C.

Haschisch or Indian Hemp.—I have been for some time trying to procure some of the Haschisch, or Indian hemp, about which Dr. Moreau has published such an amusing book, Du Haschisch et de l'Aliénation Mentale, Par. 1845.—Can any of your readers tell me where I can get any? The narcotic effects of the common hemp plant are well known in our country districts: where, under its ironical alias Honesty, the dried stalk is often smoked, but the tropical variety appears to be infinitely more powerful in its operation.

V. T. Sternberg.

Crieff Compensation.—During the rebellion in 1715, the village of Crieff, Perthshire, was burnt by the Highland army, on account of the attachment of its inhabitants to the royal cause. It has been stated that, some years ago, the descendants of the sufferers received from government a sum equivalent to a certain proportion of the loss which had been sustained.

Is there any official record in reference to this compensation?

D.

Admission to Lincoln's Inn, the Temple, and Gray's Inn.—Have there ever been published, or do there exist anywhere in MSS., lists of the persons who have been from time to time matriculated as students of those inns of court?

A publication of them would be of the greatest value to the biographical department of literature.

G.

Orders for the Household of Lord Montagu.—The second Viscount Montagu, grandson and heir of Anthony Browne, created Viscount in 1554, ob. 1592, compiled a detailed code of regulations for his family, thus entitled:

"A Booke of Orders and Rules established by me, Anthony, Viscount Mountague, for the better direction and government of my howsholde and family, together with the generall dutyes and charges apperteyninge to myne officers and other servantes. Anno Dni 1595."

Has this curious illustration of ancient domestic manners ever been published?

Albert Way.

Minor Queries with Answers

Cateaton Street.—I am anxious to ascertain the meaning and derivation of this word: the London Cateaton Street, I believe, is changed into Gresham Street. I have lately learnt that there is a Cateaton Street in Liverpool also.

Etymo.

[Cateaton Street, or "Catteten Street," says Stow, "is a corruption of Catte Street, which beginneth at the north end of Ironmonger Lane, and runneth to the west end of St. Lawrence Church." In 1845, this street was renamed Gresham Street.]

Portrait of Lee, Inventor of the Stocking-frame.—In Hatton's History of London (published in 1708), it is stated that a picture (by Balderston) of Lee, the inventor of the stocking-frame, hung in the hall of the Framework Knitters' Company. The inquirer wishes to ascertain whether the picture is yet in existence or not; and, if still in existence, where it can be seen.

M. E.

[In Cunningham's Handbook of London, p. 527., s. v. Weavers' Hall, Basinghall Street, is a quotation from the Quarterly Review for January, 1816, in which the picture is spoken of as then existing in the Stocking Weavers' Hall.]

Cocker's Arithmetic (Vol. iv., pp. 102. 149.).—Some correspondence appears in "N. & Q." about the first edition of "Old Cocker." I should be glad to ascertain the date of the latest edition.

Tyro.

[The British Museum contains the following editions of Cocker's Arithmetic:—the 20th, Lond. 1700; the 37th, perused and published by John Hawkins (with MS. notes), Lond. 1720; 41st, Lond. 1724; 50th, corrected by Geo. Fisher, Lond. 1746. Watt notices one revised by J. Mair, Edinb. 1751. In Professor de Morgan's Arithmetical Books, p. 56., where a full history of Cocker's book is given, mention is made of an Edinburgh edition, 1765, and a Glasgow edition of 1777.]

Lyke Porch or Litch Porch.—What is the proper name for the porch found, not unfrequently, at the churchyard gate under which the body was, I believe, supposed to rest before the funeral? Is it lyke or litch? The derivation may be different in different parts of England, as they were originally Saxon or Danish. Lüg Dan., lyk Dutch, and leiche Ger., are all different forms of the same word. The first two approach nearer to lyke, the latter to litch.

J. H. L.

[In most works on ecclesiastical architecture it is called lich-gate, from Anglo-Saxon lich, a corpse: hence Lich-field, the field of dead bodies. In the Glossary of Architecture we read "Lich-gate, or corpse-gate, leichengang, Germ., from the Ang.-Sax. lich, a corpse, and geat, a gate; a shed over the entrance of a churchyard, beneath which the bearers sometimes paused when bringing a corpse for interment. The term is also used in some parts of the country for the path by which a corpse is usually conveyed to the church."]

Henry Burton.—Henry Burton was born in 1579; studied at Oxford, and was at one time minister of St. Matthew, Friday Street. In 1636, he drew upon himself the vengeance of the Star-Chamber, by two discourses in which he severely inveighed against the bishops. For this offence he was fined, deprived of his ears, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was liberated by the parliament in 1640, and died in 1648. What theological works did he write?—From the Navorscher.

Dionysius.

[Burton's pen was so prolific, that we cannot find room for a list of his works; and must refer Dionysius to the Bodleian Catalogue, where they fill nearly a column, and to Watt's Bibliotheca, s.v.]

British Mathematicians.—I am anxious to learn if there is any book which contains an account of the lives and works of eminent British arithmeticians and mathematicians?

Euclid.

[Consult the following:—Biographia Philosophica: being an Account of the Lives, Writings, and Inventions of the most eminent Philosophers and Mathematicians, by Benjamin Martin: London, 1764, 8vo. There is also a Chronological Table of the most eminent Mathematicians affixed to John Bossut's General History of Mathematics, translated from the French by John Bonnycastle: London, 1803, 8vo. Some notices of our early English mathematicians will also be found in the Companion to the Almanac for 1837, and in the Magazine of Popular Science, Nos. 18. 20. and 22.]

"Les Lettres Juives."—Will any of your correspondents inform me who is the author of Lettres Juives? The first volume of my edition, in eight volumes 12mo., has the portrait of Jean Batiste B., Marquis de –, né le 29 Juin, 1704.

J. R.

Sunderland.

["Par le Marquis D'Argens," says Barbier.]

Replies

ATTAINMENT OF MAJORITY

(Vol. viii., pp. 198. 250.)

In replying to Professor De Morgan's last communication on this subject, it may be as well, in order to avoid future misunderstanding, to revert briefly to my original question. I pointed out Ben Jonson's assertion, through a character in one of his plays, that about the beginning of the seventeenth century, it was the custom to regard the legal rights of majority as commencing with six o'clock A.M., and I asked to have that assertion reconciled with our present commencement at midnight, and with the statement that the latter is in accordance with the old reckoning.

Thus I started with the production of affirmative evidence, to rebut which I cannot find, in the replies of Professor De Morgan, any negative evidence stronger than his individual opinion, which, however eminent in other respects, has undoubtedly the disadvantage of being two hundred years later than the contemporary evidence produced by me. I afterwards cited Arthur Hopton as authority that lawyers in England, in his time, did make use of a day which he classifies as that of the Babylonians; but inasmuch as he apparently restricts its duration to twelve hours, whereas all ancient writers concur in assigning to the Babylonians a day of twenty-four hours, there is evidently a mistake somewhere, attributable either to Hopton or his printers.

This mistake may have arisen either from a misprint, or from a transposition of a portion of the sentence.

The supposition of a misprint is favoured by the circumstance that Hopton was, at the time, professing to describe natural days of twenty-four hours; of these there are four great classes of commencement, from the four principal quarters of the day; viz. from midnight, from mid-day, from sun-setting and from sun-rising. Hopton had already assigned three of them to different nations, and the fourth he had properly assigned, so far as its commencement at sunrise was concerned, to the Babylonians. What, then, can be more probable than that he intended this day also, like the rest, to be of twenty-four hours' duration; and that the words "holding till sun-setting" ought, perhaps, to have been printed "holding till sun-rising?"

This way of reconciling seeming anomalies, by the supposition of probable misprints, receives great encouragement in the occasional occurrence of similar mistakes in the most carefully printed modern books. I lately noticed, while reading Sir James Ross's Southern Voyage of Discovery, a work printed by the Admiralty, and on which extraordinary typographical care had been bestowed, the following, at page 121. of vol. ii.:

"It was full moon on the 15th of September, at 5·38 A.M."

But the context shows that "full moon" ought to have been printed new moon, and that "5·38 A.M." outlet to be 5·38 P.M.: and what renders these two mistakes the more remarkable is, that they have no sort of connexion, nor is the occurrence of the one in any way explanatory of the other.

Now, the misprint of "sun-setting" for sun-rising, which I am supposing in Hopton's book, would be much more likely of occurrence than these, because these form part of a series of carefully examined data from which a scientific deduction is to be drawn, while Hopton's is a mere loose description. And, moreover, a twenty-four hour day, commencing and ending with sunrise, does not, after all, appear to be so wholly unknown to English law as Prof. De Morgan supposes, since Sir Edward Coke, to whom the professor especially refers, describes such a day in these words:

"Dies naturalis constat ea 24 horis et continet diem solarem et noctem; and therefore in Inditements for Burglary and the like, we say in nocte ejusdem diei. Iste dies naturalis est spatium in quo sol progreditur ab oriente in occidentem et ab occidente iterum in orientem."

But there is another way of reconciling the discrepancy—Hopton may not have intended the words "holding till sun-setting" to apply to the Babylonians, but only to "the lawyers in England," whose day, he says, commenced at the same time as the Babylonian day. The transposition of the words in question to the end of the sentence would give such a meaning, viz. "The Babylonians begin their day at sun-rising, and so do our lawyers count it in England, holding till sun-setting." Altered in this way, the latter clause does not necessarily apply to the Babylonians.

Here again we have a lawyers' day almost verbally identical with one assigned to them by Sir Edward Coke: "Dies artificialis sive solaris incipit in ortu solis et desinit in occasu, and of this the law of England takes hold in many cases."

Nor does Lord Coke strengthen or vary his description in the least, when speaking of the day commencing at midnight; he uses again the same expression with regard to it, "The Egyptians and Romans from midnight, and so doth the law of England in many cases."

Hence the authority of Chief Justice Coke, is at best only neutral; for who will undertake to prove to which of these classes of "many cases" Lord Coke meant to assign the attainment of majority?

In support of Ben Jonson's testimony, it may be urged that the midnight initial of the day was itself derived by us from the Romans; and it is nearly certain that they did not perform any legal act, connected with birthday, until the commencement of the dies solis.

A proof of this may be observed in the discussion by Aulus Gellius (Noct. Attic., iii. 2.) as to which day, the preceding or the following, a person's birth, happening in the night, was to be attributed. He quotes a fragment from Varro,—

"Homines qui ex media nocte ad proximam mediam noctem his horis XXIV nati sunt, uno die nati dicuntur."

On which Gellius remarks:

"From these words it may be observed that the arrangement of (birth) days was such, that to any person born after sunset, and before midnight, the day from which that night had proceeded should be the birthday; but to any person born during the last six hours of the night, the day which should succeed that night must be the birthday."

This explanation might seem almost purposely written in reply to some such difficulty as occurred to Professor de Morgan (antè, p. 250.), when he remarks that, if birthday were to be confined to daylight, "a child not born by daylight would have no birthday at all!" But since it was notorious amongst the Romans that the civil day began at midnight, such a quæri solitum as this could never have been mooted, if the birthday observance had not been known and acknowledged to have a different commencement. In continuation of the same subject, Gellius proceeds to quote another passage from Varro, which I shall also repeat, not only as furnishing still farther proof that the Romans did not regard the night as forming any part of the birthday, but also as affording an opportunity of recording an opinion as to the interpretation of Varro's words, which, in this passage, do not appear to have ever been properly understood.

After stating that many persons in Umbria reckon from noon to noon as one and the same day, Varro remarks:

"Quod quidem nimis absurdum est; nam qui calendarum hora sexta natus est apud Umbros, dies ejus natalis videri debebit et calendarum dimidiatus, et qui est post calendas dies ante horam ejusdem diei sextam."

Now why should beginning one's birthday at noon appear so absurd to Varro? Simply because the hours of the night were not then supposed to be included in the birthday at all, and therefore Varro could not realize the idea of a birthday continued through the night.

He says that, according to the Umbrian reckoning, a person born on any day after the point of noon, would have only half a birthday on that day; and for the other half, he would have to take the forenoon of the following day. Varro had no notion of joining the afternoon of one day to the forenoon of another, because he looked upon the unbroken presence of the sun as the very essence of a natal day.

Nothing can be plainer than that this was the true nature of the absurdity alluded to; but it would not suit the prejudices of the commentators, because it would compel them to admit that sexta hora must have been in the afternoon, in opposition to their favourite dogma that it was always in the forenoon.

For if Varro had intended to represent sexta hora in the forenoon, he would have said that the other half-day must be taken from the afternoon of the pridie, instead of saying, as he does say, that it must be taken from the forenoon of the postridie of the Calends.

Consequently, Varro means by "qui Calendarum hora sexta natus est," a person born in the sixth hour of the day of the Calends; the sixth hour being that which immediately succeeded noon—the media hora of Ovid. But what Varro more immediately means by it is, not any particular point of time, but generally any time after noon on the day of the Calends.

That the true position of sexta hora, when implying duration, was in the afternoon, has long been a conviction of mine; and I have elsewhere produced undeniable evidence that it was so considered by ancient authors. But this passage from Varro is a new and hitherto unnoticed proof, and certainly it ought to be a most convincing one, because it seems impossible to give Varro's words a rational meaning without the admission of this hypothesis, while with it everything is clear and consistent.

The commentators, driven by the necessity I have just pointed out, either to admit the afternoon position of sexta hora, or to abstain from reading it as a space of time, have attempted to force a meaning by reading sexta hora in its other sense, an absolute mathematical point, the punctus ipse of noon.

In so doing they have not scrupled to libel Varro's common sense; they represent his idea of the absurd to consist in the embarrassment that would be caused by the birth occurring at the critical moment of change,—split as it were upon the knife-edge of noon; so that, in the doubt that would arise as to which day it should belong, it must be attributed partly to both!

This interpretation is so monstrous, and so evidently wide of the meaning of the words, that its serious imputation would scarcely be believed, if it were not embalmed in the Delphin edition of Aulus Gellius, where we read the following footnote referring to the argumentum ad absurdum of Varro:

"Infirmum omnino argumentum, et quod perinde potest in ipsum Varronem retorqueri. Quid enim? Si quis apud Romanos Calendis hora vi. noctis fuerit natus, nonne pariter dies ejus natalis videri debebit, et partim Calendarum, et partim ejus dici qui sequetur?"

It is not worth while to inquire what may have been the precise dilemma contemplated by the writer of this note, since most certainly it is not a reflex of Varro's meaning. The word dimidiatus is completely cushioned, although Gellius himself has a chapter upon it a little farther on in the same volume.