Kitabı oku: «Notes and Queries, Number 71, March 8, 1851», sayfa 4
Replies
CRANMER'S DESCENDANTS
(Vol. iii., p. 8.)
Your correspondent may be interested to know, that Sir Anthony Chester, Bart., of Chichley, co. Bucks, married, May 21, 1657, Mary, dau. of Samuel Cranmer, Esq., alderman of London, and sister to Sir Cæsar Cranmer, Kt., of Ashwell, Bucks. This Samuel Cranmer was traditionally the last male heir of the eldest of Cranmer's sons; his descent is, I believe, stated in general terms in the epitaphs of Lady Chester, at Chichley, and Sir Cæsar Cranmer, at Ashwell. He was a great London brewer by trade, and married his cousin Mary (sister of Thomas Wood, Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, and Sir Henry Wood, Bart., of the Board of Green Cloth), dau. of Thomas Wood, Esq., of Hackney, by his wife – Cranmer. They had only two children, and it would appear from Harleian MS. No. 1476. fo. 419., which omits all mention of Sir Cæsar, that he died in his father's lifetime, and that Lady Chester was sole heiress to this branch of the Cranmers.
There are two brief pedigrees I have seen of these Cranmers, one in Harl. MS. 1476. above mentioned, the other in Philipot's Catalogue of Knights; but neither of them goes so far as to connect them with the archbishop, or even with the Nottinghamshire family; for they both begin with Samuel Cranmer's grandfather, who is described of Alcester, co. Warwick. Now the connexion is certain: could one of your readers supply me with the wanting links? Is it possible that they omit all mention of the archbishop on account of the prejudice mentioned by your correspondent; being able to supply the three generations necessary to gentility without him?
I am obliged to write without any books of reference, or I would have consulted the epitaphs in question again.
R. E. W.
I am afraid that my quotations from memory, in my letter of Saturday, were not exactly correct; for on examining Lipscomb's Buckinghamshire to-day, I find that it is stated (vol. iv. pp. 4-7.) on the monument of Samuel Cranmer at Astwood Bury, that he was "descended in a direct line from Richard Cranmer, elder brother to Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury;" and that it was found, on an inquisition held on April 7, 1640, that his son and heir Cæsar Cranmer (called on the monument "Sir Cæsar Wood Ate Cranmer, Kt.") was his heir at six years of age. This Cæsar was knighted by Charles II., and died unmarried; so that his sister, Lady Chester, was evidently the representative of this branch of the Cranmer family.
Now, with regard to this statement on the monument, in the first place it is discrepant with Lady Chester's epitaph at Chichley, which (Lipscomb's Bucks, vol. iv. p. 97.) expressly declares that she derived her descent from the archbishop. In the next place it appears from Thoroton's Notts, that the archbishop had no elder brother named Richard. His elder brother's name was John; who by Joan, dau. of John Frechevill, Esq., had two sons, Thomas and Richard. Could this be the Richard alluded to? In the third place, in neither of the pedigrees alluded to is there given any connexion with the family of Cranmer of Aslacton. And, lastly, it is opposed to the uniform tradition of the family. Now, if any of your readers can clear up this difficulty, or will refer me to any other pedigree of the Cranmers, I shall feel extremely obliged to him.
With the exception of the points now noticed, my former letter was perfectly correct, and may be relied on in every respect.
I may mention that these Cranmers were from Warwickshire. The monument states that Samuel Cranmer was born at "Aulcester" in that county, "about the year 1575."
R. E. W.
DUTCH POPULAR SONG-BOOK
(Vol. iii., p. 22.)
The second edition of the song-book mentioned by the Hermit of Holyport must have been published between 1781 and 1810, as the many popular works printed for S. and W. Koene may testify. In 1798 they lived on the Linde gracht, but shifted afterwards their dwelling-place to the Boomstraat. For the above information—about a trifle, interesting enough to call a hermit from his memento-mori cogitations—I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. J. J. Nieuwenhuyzen.
But, alas! what can I, the man with a borrowed name and borrowed learning, say in reply to the first Query of the busy anchorite? He will believe me, when I tell his reverence that I am not Janus Dousa. What's in the name, that I could choose it? Must I confess? A token of grateful remembrance; the only means of making myself known to a British friend of my youth, but for whom I would perhaps never have enjoyed Mr. Hermit's valuable contributions—the medium, in short, of being recognised incognito. Will this do? Or must I say, copying a generous correspondent of "Notes and Queries,"—Spare my blushes, I am
J. H. van Lennep.
Amsterdam, Feb. 25. 1851.
BARONS OF HUGH LUPUS
(Vol. iii., p. 87.)
Your correspondent P. asks for information respecting the families and descendants of William Malbank and Bigod de Loges, two of the Barons of Hugh Lupus, Earl of Chester, whose signatures are affixed to the charter of foundation of St. Werburgh's Abbey at Chester.
Of the descendants of William Malbank I can learn nothing; but it appears from the MS. catalogue of the Norman nobility before the Conquest, that Roger and Robert de Loges possessed lordships in the district of Coutances in Normandy. One at least, Roger, must have accompanied the Conqueror to England (and his name appears in the roll of Battle Abbey as given by Fox), for we find that he held lands in Horley and Burstowe in Surrey. His widow, Gunuld de Loges, held the manor of Guiting in Gloucestershire of King William; and in the year 1090 she gave two hides of land to the monastery of Gloucester to pray for the soul of her husband. Roger had two sons, Roger and Bigod, or, as he is sometimes called, Robert. The former inherited the lands in Surrey. One of his descendants (probably his great-grandson) was high sheriff of Surrey and Sussex in the years 1267, 1268, and 1269. His son Roger de Loges owned lands and tenements in Horley, called La Bokland, which he sold to the Abbot of Chertsea. His successor, John de Logge of Burstowe, witnessed in the tenth year of Edward II. a deed relating to the transfer of land in Hadresham, Surrey. The name became gradually corrupted to Lodge.
To return to the subject of inquiry, Bigod de Loges—
"held five tenements in Sow of the Earl of Chester, by the service of conducting the said earl towards the king's court through the midst of the forest of Cannock, meeting him at Rotford bridge upon his coming, and at Hopwas bridge on his return. In which forest the earl might, if he pleased, kill a deer at his coming, and another at his going back: giving unto Loges each time he should so attend him a barbed arrow. Hugo de Loges granted to William Bagot all his lands in Sow, to hold of him the said Hugo and his heirs, by the payment of a pair of white gloves at the feast of St. Michael yearly."—Dugdale.
Bigod de Loges had two sons, Hugo and Odardus:
"Odardus de Loges was infeoffed by Ranulphus de Meschines, Earl of Chester, in the baronies of Stanyton, Wigton, Doudryt, Waverton, Blencoyd, and Kirkbride, in the county of Cumberland; and the said Odardus built Wigton church and endowed it. He lived until King John's time. Henry I. confirmed the grant of the barony to him, by which it is probable that he lived a hundred years. He had issue Adam. Adam had issue Odard, the lord, whose son and heir, Adam the Second, died without issue, and Odard the Fourth likewise," &c.—Denton's MS.
Of the branch settled in Staffordshire and Warwickshire—
"Hugo de Loges married, tempo Richard I., Margerie, daughter and heiress of Robert de Brok. By this marriage Hugo became possessed of the manor of Casterton in Warwickshire. He was forester of Cannock chace. He had issue Hugo de Loges, of Chesterton, whose son and heir, Sir Richard de Loges, died 21st of Edward I. Sir Richard had issue two sons, Richard and Hugo. The eldest, Richard of Chesterton, left issue an only daughter, Elizabeth, married to Nicholas de Warwick. The issue of this marriage was John de Warwick, whose daughter and heiress, Eleonora, married Sir John de Peto, and brought the manor of Chesterton into that family."—Dugdale.
M. J. T.
SHAKSPEARE'S "ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA."
(Vol. iii., p. 139.)
The scene in Antony and Cleopatra contains two expressions which are in Henry VIII.—
"Learn this, Silius."
"Learn this, brother."—Hen. VIII.
"The Captain's captain."
"To be her Mistress' mistress, the Queen's queen."—Hen. VIII.
The first of these passages is in a scene in Henry VIII., which Mr. Hickson gives to Fletcher (and of which, by-the-bye, it may be observed, that, like the scene in Antony and Cleopatra, it has nothing to do with the business of the play). The other is in a scene which he gives to Shakspeare.
But, perhaps, there may be doubts whether rightly. I am exceedingly ignorant in Fletcher; but here is a form of expression which occurs twice in the scene, which, I believe, is more conformable to the practice of Fletcher:—
"A heed was in his countenance."
"And force them with a constancy."
There is very great stiffness in the versification: one instance is quite extraordinary:
"Yet I know her for
A spleeny Lutheran; and not wholesome to
Our cause, that she should lie i' the bosom of
Our hard rul'd king."
There is great stiffness and tameness in the matter in many places.
Lastly, what Mr. Hickson hopes he has taken off Shakspeare's shoulders, the compliments to the Queen and the King, is brought in here most forcedly:—
"She (i.e. A. Boleyn) is a gallant creature, and complete
In mind and feature. I persuade me, from her
Will fall some blessings to this land, which shall
In it be memoriz'd."
But there is also the general question, whether, either upon à priori probability, or inferences derived from particular passages, we are bound to suppose that the two authors wrote scene by scene. Shakspeare might surely be allowed to touch up scenes, of which the mass might be written by Fletcher.
As to the dates, Mr. Collier is persuaded that Henry VIII. was written in the winter of 1603-4. The accession of James was in March, 1603. Mr. Collier thinks that the compliments to Queen Elizabeth were not written in her lifetime. He thinks that, even in the last year of her long reign, no one would have ventured to call her an "aged princess," though merely as a way of saying that she would have a long reign; and he says, there is not the slightest evidence that the compliment to King James was an interpolation. But surely it is strong evidence that if there is no interpolation, this passage—
"As when
The bird of wonder dies, the maiden phœnix,"
afterwards—
"When Heav'n shall call her from this cloud of darkness,"
and then, after disposing of the King—
"She shall be to the happiness of England
An aged princess . . .
. . . . . .
Would I had known no more—but she must die;
She must—the saints must have her yet a virgin," &c.
would be ridiculous. All that can be said is, that either way it is partly ridiculous to make it a matter of prophecy and lamentation that a human being must, sometime or other, die.
But it is very difficult to conceive that the compliments to Elizabeth should have been written after her death.
Fletcher, born in 1579, did not, in Mr. Dyce's opinion, bring out anything singly or jointly with Beaumont till 1606 or 1607.
The irrelevant scenes, like that of Ventidius, are introduced with two objects—one to gain time, the other for the sake of naturalness: of the latter of which there are two instances in Macbeth; one where the King talks of the swallows' nests: the other, relating to the English king touching for the evil, seems remarkably suited to the mind of Shakspeare.
C. B.
"SUN, STAND THOU STILL UPON GIBEON!"
(JOSH. x. 12.)
(Vol. iii., p. 137.)
The observations of I. K. upon this passage have obviously proceeded from a praiseworthy wish to remove what has appeared to some minds to be inconsistent with that perfect truth which they expect to be the result of divine inspiration. I. K. doubtless believes that God put it into the heart of Joshua to utter a command for the miraculous continuance of daylight. But why should he expect the inspiration to extend so far as to instruct Joshua respecting the manner in which that continuance was to be brought about? Joshua was not to be the worker of the miracle. It was to be wrought by Him who can as easily stop any part of the stupendous machinery of His universe, as we can stop the wheels of a watch. Joshua was left to speak, as he naturally would, in terms well fitted to make those around him understand, and tell others, that the sun and moon, whom the defeated people notoriously worshipped, were so far from being able to protect their worshippers, that they were made to promote their destruction at the bidding of Joshua, whom God had commissioned to be the scourge of idolaters. And when the inspired recorder of the miracle wrote that "the sun stood still," he told what the eyes saw, with the same truth as I might say that the sun rose before seven this morning. Inspiration was not bestowed to make men wise in astronomy, but wise unto salvation.
Those who think that the inspired penman should have said "the earth stood still," in order to give a perfectly true account of the miracle, have need to be told, or would do well to remember, that the stopping of the diurnal revolution of the earth, in order to keep the sun and moon's apparent places the same, would not involve a cessation of its motion in its orbit, still less a cessation of that great movement of the whole solar system, by which it is now more than conjectured that the sun, the moon, and the earth are all carried on together at the rate of above 3700 miles in an hour; so that to say "the earth stood still" would be liable to the same objection, viz., that of not being astronomically true. I. K. carries his notion of the "inseparable connexion" of the sun "with all planetary motion" too far, when he supposes that a stoppage of the sun's motion round its own axis would have any effect on our planet. The note he quotes from Kitto's Pictorial Bible is anything but satisfactory; and that from Mant is childishly common-place. Good old Scott adverts with propriety to the Creator's power to keep all things in their places, when the earth's revolution was stopped; but when he endeavoured to illustrate it by the little effect of a ship's casting anchor when under full sail, he should have consulted his friend Newton, who would have stopped such an imagination. Another commentator, Holden, has argued, in spite of the Hebrew, that "in the midst of heaven" cannot mean mid-day, having made up his mind that the moon can never be seen at that hour!
Such helpers do but make that difficult which, if received in its simplicity, need neither perplex a child nor a philosopher.
H. W.
Replies to Minor Queries
Ulm Manuscript (Vol. iii., p. 60.).—The late Bishop Butler's collection of manuscripts is in the British Museum. I send you a copy of the bishop's own description of the MS. (which should be called the St. Gall MS.), from the printed Catalogue, which was prepared for a sale by auction, previous to the negociation with the trustees for the purchase of the collection for the nation.
"Acta Apostolorum. Epistolæ Pauli et Catholicæ cum Apocalypsi. Latinè. Sæculi IX. Upon Vellum. 4to.
The date of this most valuable and important manuscript is preserved by these verses:
'Iste liber Pauli retinet documenta sereni
Hartmodus Gallo quem contulit Abba Beato,
Si quis et hunc Sancti sumit de culmine Galli
Hunc Gallus Paulusque simul dent pestibus amplis.'
Which I thus have tried to imitate:
Thys boke conteynes the doctrynes of Seynct Paull,
Hartmodus thabbat yeve yt to Seynct Gall;
Gyf any tak thys boke from hygh Seynct Gall,
Seynct Gall appall hym and Seynct Paull hym gall.
Hartmodus was Abbot of St. Gall in the Grisons from A.D. 872 to 874. The MS. therefore may be earlier than the former, but cannot be later than the latter date.
This MS. is of the very highest importance. It contains the celebrated passage of St. John thus: 'Quia tres sunt, qui testimonium dant, Spliritus, aqua, et sanguis, et tres unum sunt. Sicut in cœlo tres sunt, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus, et tres unum sunt.' This most important word Sicut clearly shows how the disputed passage, from having been a Gloss crept into the text. And on the first page prior to the Seven Catholic Epistles is the Prologue of St. Jerome, bearing his name in uncials, which Porson and other learned men think spurious. See Porson's Letters to Travis, p. 290."—Bp. Butler's Manuscript Catalogue.
H. Foss.
Rotherhithe, Jan. 29. 1851.
Harrison's Chronology (Vol. iii., p. 105.).—To the querist on William Harrison all lovers of bibliography are under obligations. At Oxford, amid the Bodleian treasures, he could not have had many questions to ask: at Thurles the case may be much otherwise, and he is entitled to a prompt reply.
After examining the Typographical Antiquities of Ames and Herbert, and various bibliographical works, relying also on my own memory as a collector of books for more than thirty years, I may venture to assert that the Chronology of W. Harrison has never been printed. I can further assert that no copy of the work is recorded in the Catalogi librorum manuscriptorum Angliæ et Hiberniæ, Oxoniæ, 1697.
The best account of Harrison is given by bishop Tanner, in his Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica. Wood, however, should be consulted. With reference to the events of his life, it is important to observe that the date of his letter to sir William Brooke, which may be called an autobiography in miniature, is 1577.
Assuming that this question could not escape the notice of other contributors, I had made no researches with a view to answer it, and shall be happy to remedy the defects of this scrap at a future time.
Bolton Corney.
Mistletoe on Oaks (Vol. ii., pp. 163, 214.).—Is it ever found now on other trees? Sir Thos. Browne (Vulg. Err. lib. ii. cap. vi. § 3.) says, "We observe it in England very commonly upon Sallow, Hazell, and Oake." By-the-bye, Dr. Bell (p. 163.) seems to adopt the belief, which it is Browne's object in the section referred to above to refute, viz., that "Misseltoe is bred upon trees, from seeds which birds let fall thereon." Have later observations shown that it was Browne himself who was in error?
Ache.
Swearing by Swans (Vol. iii., p. 70.).—An instance of the cognate custom of swearing by pheasants is given by Michelet, Précis de l'Histoire Moderne (pp. 19, 20.). On the taking of Constantinople by the Turks,—
"L'Europe s'émut enfin: Nicholas V. prêcha la croisade.... à Lille, le duc de Bourgoyne fit apparaître, dans un banquet, l'image de l'Eglise désolée et, selon les rites de la chevalerie, jura Dieu, la Vierge, les dames, et le faisan, qu'il irait combattre les infidèles." (1454.)
It seems, however, that in spite of all these formalities, the oath did not sit very heavily on the conscience of the taker: for we are told immediately after that—
"Cette ardeur dura peu.... le duc de Bourgoyne resta dans ses états."
Michelet gives, as his authority, Olivier de la Marche, t. viii. De la Collection des Mémoires rélatifs à l'Hist. de France, edit. de M. Petitot.
X. Z.
Jurare ad caput animalium (Vol. ii., p. 392; Vol. iii., p. 71.).—Schayes, a Belgic writer (in Les Pays Bas avant et durant la Domination Romaine, vol. ii. p. 73. et seq.), furnishes references to two councils, in which this mode of swearing was condemned, viz. Concil. Aurelianense (Orleans), A.D. 541, and Concil. Liptinense (Liptines or Lestines), 743. On the Indiculus Paganiarum of the latter he subjoins the commentaries of Des Roches (Anc. Mém. de l'Acad. de Brux.), de Meinders (de statu relig. sub Carolo M., p. 144.), d'Eckart (Francia Orient, lib. i. p. 407.), de Canciani (de Legibus barbaror., tom. iii. p. 78.). The enquirer may also consult Riveli Opera on the Decalogue; Petiti, Observ. Miscell. lib. iv. c. 7.: "Defenditur Socrates ab improba Lactantii calumnia et de ejus jusjurando per canem:" and Alex. ab Alexandro, Geniales Dies, lib. v. c. 10.
I may avail myself of this opportunity of noticing the misprint in p. 152., Vezron for Pezron.
T. J.
Ten Children at a Birth (Vol. ii., p. 459.; Vol. iii., p. 64.).—We are indebted to the obliging courtesy of the editor of the Leeds Mercury for the following extract from that paper of the 9th October, 1781:—
"A letter from Sheffield, dated October 1, says, 'This day one Ann Birch, formerly of Derby, who came to work at the silk-mills here, was delivered of TEN children; nine were dead, and one living, which, with the mother, is likely to do well.'"
Our informant adds—
"I never heard of any silk-mills at Sheffield. If there was a Medical Society in Sheffield then, its records might be examined."
Can our correspondent N. D. throw any further light upon this certainly curious and interesting case?
Richard Standfast (Vol. iii., p. 143.).—This divine is buried in Christ Church, Bristol; having been rector of that church for the long space of fifty-one years. There is a monument erected to his memory in the above-mentioned building, with the following inscription:—
"Near this place lieth the body of Richard Standfast, Master of Arts, of Sidney College in Cambridge, and Chaplain-in-Ordinary to his Majesty King Charles I., who for his loyalty to the King and stedfastness in the established religion, suffered fourteen years' sequestration. He returned to his place in Bristol at the restoration of King Charles II., was then made prebendary of the cathedral church of Bristol, and for twenty years and better (notwithstanding his blindness) performed the offices of the church exactly, and discharged the duties of an able, diligent, and orthodox preacher. He was Rector of Christ Church upwards of fifty-one years, and died August 24, in the seventy-eighth year of his age, and in the year of Our Lord 1681.
He shall live again."
The following additional lines, composed by himself, were taken down from his own mouth two days before his death; and are, according to his own desire, inscribed on his tomb:—
"Jacob was at Bethel found,
And so may we, though under ground.
With Jacob there God did intend,
To be with him where'ver he went,
And to bring him back again,
Nor was that promise made in vain.
Upon which words we rest in confidence
That he which found him there will fetch us hence.
Nor without cause are we persuaded thus,
For where God spake with him, he spake with us."
Besides the work your correspondent mentions, he wrote a book, entitled a Caveat against Seducers.
J. K. R. W.
Feb. 22. 1851.
"Jurat, crede minus" (Vol. iii., p. 143.).—This epigram was quoted by Sir Ed. Coke on the trial of Henry Garnet. The author I cannot tell, but F. R. R. may be glad to trace it up thus far.
