Читать книгу: «Notes and Queries, Number 09, December 29, 1849», страница 5

Various

Шрифт:

QUERIES

THE LAST OF THE VILLAINS

It would be an interesting fact if we could ascertain the last bondsman by blood—nativus de sanguine—who lived in this country. The beginning of the seventeenth century is the period usually referred to as the date of the extinction of personal villenage. In the celebrated argument in the case of the negro Somerset (State Trials, vol. xx. p. 41), an instance as late as 1617-18 is cited as the latest in our law books. (See Noy's Reports, p. 27.) It is probably the latest recorded claim, but it is observable that the claim failed, and that the supposed villain was adjudged to be a free man. I can supply the names of three who were living near Brighton in the year 1617, and whose thraldom does not appear to have been disputed. Norden, from whose unpublished Survey of certain Crown Manors I have extracted the following notice, adverts to the fact, but seems to think that the times were rather unfavourable to any attempt by the lord of the manor to put his rights in force.

"There are three bondmen of bloude belonginge unto this manor, never known to be anie way mannumissed, namely, Thomas Goringe, William and John Goringe. Thomas Goringe dwells at Amberley, William at Piddinghow, and John Goringe at Rottingdean. What goods they have the Jurie know not. All poor men. Thomas hath the reversion of a cotage now in the tenure of William Jefferye. But mee thinks this kinde of advantage is nowe out of season; yet, were they men of ability, they might be, upon some consideration, infraunchized." (Survey of the Manor of Falmer, Sussex.)

I shall be glad to know whether any more recent instance can be pointed out.

E. SMIRKE.

THE DORE OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

In Herbert's edition of Ames's Typographical Antiquities, 1785, vol. i. p. 492., is noticed The Dore of Holy Scripture, 12mo., printed by John Gowghe in 1536; and, at p. 494., a reprint of the same work is mentioned in 1540, by the same printer, and a description of a copy given from one then in the possession of Herbert himself. In the preface prefixed by the printer, he calls the work "the prologue of the fyrste translatoure of the byble out of latyn in to Englyshe;" and at the end of the work is this note:—"Perused by doctor Taylor and doctor Barons, Master Ceton and Master Tornor." As I am much interested in the subject to which this publication refers, may I ask for information on three points?—1. What evidence is there of this edition of 1536, beyond the statement in Ames? 2. What has become of the copy of the edition of 1540, formerly belonging to Herbert? and, 3. Who are the persons who peruse and revise the latter edition? There is not copy of either edition, as far as I can trace, in the British Museum, in the Bodleian, or at Lambeth.

I may add to these queries the following remarks:—

1. Ames asserted that The Dore of Holy Scripture was among the books prohibited to be read by the injunctions of Henry the Eighth, and refers, as his authority, to Foxe's Acts and Monument, ed. 1562, p. 574. Herbert, in a note, questions the fact, and raises a doubt as to the existence of the passage in Foxe, since it is not in the edition of 1641. I have, however, the first edition now before me of 1563 (not 1562), and at p. 574., among "the names of certen bokes whiche after this injunction [namely, of 1539], or some other in the said kinges dayes were prohybited," occurs, "Item, the doore of holy scripture. made by Jhon. Gowghe."

2. This work was again printed by Crowley in 1550, 12mo., under a different title, namely, The Pathway to Perfect Knowledge; and in the preface, he falsely ascribes it to John Wycliffe, and adds, "the original wherof is in an olde English Bible, betwixt the Olde Testament and the Newe, which Bible remaineth now in the Kyng his Majesties chamber." This Bible appears to be the identical manuscript copy of the later Wycliffe version of the Scriptures, now preserved in the University Library, Cambridge, and marked Mm 2. 15. A copy of Crowley's edition is in the British Museum, but the orthography and language of the tract are modernised.

F.M. B.M., Dec. 19.

TURNER'S MS. HISTORY OF WESTMINSTER—CRUCIFIX OF EDWARD THE CONFESSOR

On April 6. 1708, Henry Turner was elected, by the vestry, organist of St. Margaret's, Westminster, in the room of the famous "Father Smith" (Bernard Schmidt). As regards his musical capabilities, Hawkins does not assign him a niche in his Temple of Worthies, although he names some of his predecessors and successors in that office. One merit we must accord him, that of true antiquarian love and zeal in all matters regarding "this renowned city." "Great materials are said to have been collected for a full description (of Westminster), by a parish-clerk of St. Margaret's. I presume this is Henry Turner, mentioned in Widmore's Account of the Writers of the History of Westminster Abbey.... His book was only a survey of the city of Westminster, purposely omitting the history of the (collegiate) church."—Gough, Brit. Top. vol. i. p. 761. Lond. 1780. "The man's natural parts were very good; he was also very diligent in making enquiries relating to his subject, and he had collected a great deal."—Widmore's Acc. of Writers of the Hist. of Westm. Abbey, pp. 6, 7. Lond. 1751. As regards his personal history, I alighted on some curious notes on a fly-leaf of a transcript of a register: "Henry Turner, borne at Yearely, Derbyshire, 12. July, 1679: married Eliz. Sabin, of Clement Danes, in St. Margrts. Westmr. Feb. 26. 1701. by Dr. Onley."

In 1697 it was discovered that some valuable MS. records belonging to the parish, and taken out of the Tower of London, had been lost by their keeper. This history in its time appears to have suffered the same fate. However, there is this entry in the Harleian MSS. 7045. fol. 361.: "From the learned Dr. Kennet, Dean of Peterborough's Collection. MSS. MS. H. On Aug. 2. 1708, at Windsor, I read over the History of the Parish of St. Margaret's, Westminster, drawn up in MS. by one of the parish clerks." Some interesting extracts follow. Compare Aysc. Add. MSS. Brit. Mus. 4163. fol. 5. Bishop Kennet resided in St. James's Street, in this parish, and died there on Dec. 19. 1728. I have applied in vain for any account of this MS. to the librarians of Windsor Castle and Eton College.

Can any of your readers give a clue to its recovery? Are any aware that this survey, which would be valuable now, still exists? There is an instance, as early as the fifteenth century, of the union of the offices of lay-clerk and organist in St. Margaret's, in the person of one Metyngham, and H. Turner also held them at the same time; since, on July 28th, 1713, he was elected parish-clerk by the vestry, in "consideration of the experience they had of fitness and diligence in executing the office of deputy-clerk of this parish for several years last past;" and he did not resign the place of organist until 2nd October, 1718.

May I make another Query?—The gold chain and crucifix, laid in the grave of K. Edward the Confessor, were removed by Charles Taylor, and given into the hands of King James II. On the reverse of the same cross was pictured a Benedictine monk, in his habit, and on each side of him these capital Roman letter,—

What does the inscription mean? Is the former portion to be understood "[Greek: A. O. Zoae agion Christos]"? What is the import of the latter?

MACKENZIE WALCOTT, M.A.

THE TALISMAN OF CHARLEMAGNE

Many years back, "Prince" Louis Napoleon was stated to be in possesion of the talisman of Charlemagne;—"a small nut, in a gold filigree envelopment, found round the neck of that monarch on the opening of his tomb, and given by the town of Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) to Buonaparte, and by him to his favourite Hortense, ci-de-vant Queen of Holland, at whose death it descended to her son," the present President of the French Republic.

The Germans have a curious legend connected with this talisman. It was framed by some of the magi in the train of the ambassadors of Aaroun-al-Raschid to the mighty Emperor of the West, at the instance of his spouse Fastrada, with the virtue that her husband should be always fascinated towards the person or thing on which it was. The constant love of Charles to this his spouse was the consequence; but, as it was not taken from her finger after death, the affection of the emperor was continued unchanging to the corpse, which he would on no account allow to be interred, even when it became offensive. His confessor, having some knowledge of the occult sciences, at last drew off the amulet from the inanimate body, which was then permitted to be buried; but he retained possession of it himself, and thence became Charles's chief favourite and prime minister, till he had been promoted to the highest ecclesiastical dignity, as Archbishop of Mainz and Chancellor of the Empire. At this pitch of power, whether he thought he could rise no higher, or scruples of conscience were awakened by the hierarchical vow, he would hold the heathen charm no longer, and he threw it into a lake not far from his metropolitan seat, where the town of Ingethüm now stands. The regard and affection of the monarch were immediately diverted from the monk, and all men, to the country surrounding the lake; and he determined on building there a magnificent palace for his constant residence, and robbed all the ancient royal and imperial residences, even to the distance of Ravenna, in Italy, to adorn it. Here he subsequently resided and died: but it seems the charm had a passive as well as an active power; his throes of death were long and violent; and though dissolution seemed every moment impending, still he lingered in ceaseless agony, till the Archbishop, who was called to his bed-side to administer the last sacred rites, perceiving the cause, caused the lake to be dragged, and, silently restoring the talisman to the person of the dying monarch, his struggling soul parted quietly away. The grave was opened by the third Otto in 997, and possibly the town of Aachen may have been thought the proper depository of the powerful drug, to be by them surrendered to one who was believed by many, as he believed himself to be, a second Charlemagne.

So much for the introduction to the following Queries:—1. Can any of your readers say whether this amulet is still in possession of the President of the French Republic? 2. If so, might not the believers in the doctrines of Sympathy attribute the votes of the six millions who, in Dec. 1848, voted in favour of his election, to the sympathetic influence of his "nut in gold filigree," and be justified in looking upon those who voted for his rivals as no true Franks? It was originally concocted for a Frankish monarch of pure blood, and may be supposed to exercise its potency only on those of genuine descent and untainted lineage.