Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

LEVIS.-In or about the year 1649, one Christopher Levis settled as a yeoman in the parish of Harby, near Melton Mowbray, co. Leicester, being already a member of the then rising sect of Quakers. From a careful search through the Leicestershire transcripts, which are fairly complete from 1612 to 1640, I was able to say that the surname of Levis, uncommon in every part of England save one, was previous to 1648 all but unknown in that county, and that therefore Christopher was, at the date I have cited, of recent importation. From B. and A., temp. Car. I., I discovered the existence of a respectable yeoman family of the name at Beeston, in the adjoining county of Nottingham. This led me to visit Beeston, fully expecting to find the baptism of Christopher somewhere about 1620; that was the year I guessed as most probable from the data I had.

On arrival at Beeston I was amply rewarded, for the register of that parish, from 1574 onwards, was scarcely a year without at least one Levis entry, and in 1621 I found "Christopher Levis fl Richardi baptiz 20° die Septemb."*

This, taken in conjunction with the facts I have stated and also that the Leicestershire Christopher was nearly related to the family of Need, of Arnold, co. Notts, and named his second son Richard, leaves but little doubt of the identity of the child christened at Beeston in 1620 with his namesake settled in Leicestershire some twenty-nine years later and then recently married. The descendants of this Christopher have, however, a tradition that he was of French extraction, a tradition which I doubted at the outset: firstly, because, on the face of it, it was extremely improbable that a refugee, or the son of a refugee, would settle as a farmer in an English country village; and, secondly, because I have found that family traditions which rest merely on verbal testimony covering over a century are invariably erroneous. In the present case, however, I am bound to admit there is one circumstance which seems to support the tradition.

In a subsidy for co. Notts, 34 & 35 H. VIII. (P.R.O., 169/150), under "Kyrkbye in Asshfelde," appears "xpofero levys in goods, xl" iiij."

Christopher Levis, of Harby, "being weake in body," made his will 19 Oct., 1677, and sealed with crest, a spear erect piercing a dolphin. His eldest son, Samuel Levis, renounced the executorship 6 Nov., 1678, sealing such renunciation with arms, a chevron between three dolphins, above the shield-there is no wreath-a coronet, three straw. berry leaves in full view, two others only partially

visible.

"Grand Cross" per Toby, "I think I hear a smile" To use the language of "Toby, M.P.," or rather amongst genealogists at my daring to quote a seal temp. Car. II. as evidence; but, my brethren, ere that smile die away over your coffin-plate rubbings, I beg you to consider the premises. The father seals with crest, the son with arms, which are evidently part and parcel of the same achievement. Is it not, therefore, fair to assume in this case that the seals were personal?

To bring this very lengthy query to a close, I would ask, Of what foreign order of nobility is such coronet, as described, the symbol; and was any French family ever entitled to bear this coat or crest? Please do not refer me to printed books; these I have ransacked long ago.

C. E. GILDERSOME-DICKINSON.

To the critical

Lincolnshire tells me that in the first quarter of HARVEST CUSTOM.-A lady who is a native of the present century "the old sow" used to appear in that county at harvest suppers. eye this curious animal was nothing more nor less than two men dressed up in sacks to personate a with cuttings from a furze-bush, and its habit was traditional visitor to the feast. Its head was filled to prick every one whom it honoured with its attentions. "I used to be very much afraid of it, when I was a child," says my informant. was the part of the harvest supper which I never could like." Can any folk-lorist enlighten me concerning the lineage of "the sow," and tell me whether she still appears after the ingathering of the corn? Is she related to Gullinbursti, the boar which drew the car of Frey in the Norse mythology? Gullinbursti is said to typify the fields of ripe corn over which Frey is lord as bestower of sunshine and rain and protector of corps.

"That

B. L. R. C.

"FED TO."-How long has this perversion of the word fed lasted? One seldom reads a report on any agricultural subject but one hears of cake, &c., being fed to bullocks, neat cattle, or sheep. Twenty years ago the bullock was fed with cake, now cake is fed to the bullock. This misuse of the word is unnecessary, as we still have the word given. I have heard a child's bib called a feeder-another misuse of the word.

JOHN PAKENHAM STILWELL. GEOFFREY DE Chandever.—In the Archeological Journal, p. 58, 1861, W. S. Walford and

Albert Way identify the above person with a witness in a deed of William de Fortibus, Earl of Albemarle, Gauf de Campo Denar, remarking,—

"If an Anglo-Saxon scribe did translate Campenys, now Champneys, into De Campo Denariorum, it was not a bolder flight than his who rendered Hussey by Usus Mare. We have sought in vain for some other mention of this Sir Geoffrey, to clear up the obscurity that envelopes his existence."

[ocr errors]

Prof. Montagu Burrows gives many references to a family named De Campaine in his history of the Brocas family. The sister of William of Wykeham was Agnes Champneys; and a family named after the valley of the Candever, in Hampshire, according to Millard and Baigent's History of Basingstoke,' Richard and William, in 1269 and 1271, were the king's huntsmen; but the name of Geoffrey de Candever has not, except in the above reference, been discovered. Information_concerning this family much desired. VICAR.

SIR JOHN HALL, K.C.H.-I have been informed that Sir John Hall's statue was in the old Royal Exchange, amongst others. Could you kindly tell

me if this is true? South Hackney.

C. H. C.

CANNIBALISM IN THE BRITISH ISLES.-On p. 175 of the second part of a book in the Bodleian Library, entitled "Libre Primer Dels Miracles Que Lo Senyor Ha Obrats Per medi de la sanctissima Reliquia del glorios sanct Ioan Baptista. Compost per lo Pare Presentat Fra Michel Llot del Orde de S. Domingo, Doctor y Cathedratich de Theologia en la Vniuersitat de Perpinya. Dirigit als Illustres y fidelissimos Consols, de la mateixa vila de Perpinya. En Perpinya en casa de Sampso Arbus (1590)" it is stated that cannibalism was practised in Perpignan during a siege of that place at the end of the Middle Age, when the inhabitants were reduced to eating, among other things, "caualls, gats, cans, rates, y carn humana." Where can one find any information as to the eating of human flesh in the British islands as the result of war or any other barbarity?

Tolosa, Spain.

PALAMEDES.

[blocks in formation]

CHINESE LANGUAGE.-I have before me as I write a unique curiosity, about which I desire a piece of information. It is the opium pipe used all his life by the Chinaman Dickens immortalized in 'Edwin Drood.' It bears on the bamboo stem two Chinese characters, Kung-ho, of which phrase perhaps one of your readers can tell me the meaning. The first word is represented by the fortyeighth radical, and both are musical notes of the Chinese scale. Of course they are not used musically

[blocks in formation]

SPRING GARDENS.

(8th S. viii. 369, 439, 511; ix. 49.)

MR. F. G. STEPHENS has contributed an inter

esting account of the two Societies of Artists, and his statement respecting the Great Room in Spring Gardens is of great value. I am the more interested in this, because I fear I have misled some by suggesting that this room still exists in the buildings of the London County Council. Thanks to MR. STEPHENS's researches, it seems to be certain that the room was destroyed, and that some of the Council's offices were built on the site.

I think that some of the particulars relating to the history of the two Societies of Artists will bear revision; and therefore, having the catalogues and other sources of information before me, I propose to make a few notes on the various points in the order in which MR. STEPHENS sets them down :

1. Romney. George Romney (spelt Rumney in the Catalogue) exhibited in the 1763 exhibition at the Society of Arts two pictures (for one of which he received the Society's prize of 25 guineas), two pictures in 1764, two in 1765, two in 1766, one in 1767, and three in 1769. In 1770 he went over to the Incorporated Society. These facts dispose of MR. STEPHENS's contention that Romney was not connected with the Free Society.

poration of the Society of Artists of Great Britain 2. Incorporated Society. The charter of incoris dated 1765, and not 1767.

exhibition at the Foundling Hospital in 1759 3. Hogarth. I do not know how much the influenced the opening of the first general exhibition of pictures at the Society of Arts in 1760, but certainly Hogarth was not the chief promoter of the latter. His name is associated with the exhibition of the Society of Artists in 1761 (in Spring Gardens), because, besides showing several pictures he prepared a frontispiece for the Catalogue; but he contributed nothing to the first exhibition. It was Francis Hayman, Chairman of the Committee of Artists, who applied to the Society of Arts for permission to arrange an exhibition of pictures, &c. Hayman had seven years before acted as Chairman of a Committee of Artists formed for the purpose of starting an "academy for the improvement of painting, sculpture, and architecture."

4. In saying that the Society of Arts lent the room to the artists for an exhibition, MR. STEPHENS does not do full justice to the work of the Society of Arts. The exhibitions held in the

Society's rooms were really under its supervision, and therefore the first general picture exhibition in England is that of the Society of Arts. When Hayman wrote to the Society his letter was referred to a full and important Committee, who reported favourably on the proposal. Regulations were passed by the Society governing the exhibition, and it was resolved :

"1. That this exhibition be confined to the productions of the artists resident in Great Britain or Ireland.

2. That all the productions in the polite arts coming from the Committee of Artists be received. "3. That the productions of all other artists in the polite arts be also received.

4. That no production be received except the name

of the artist be sent therewith." It was further resolved that

"a Committee of the Society be appointed to view the productions of the polite arts (not coming from the Committee of Artists) before they are put up in the Society's apartment. That the said Committee have power to reject such pieces as they may think unbecoming their dignity to have exposed under their permission. That the said Committee may appoint the places where all the productions may be hung or exhibited, in case any dispute shall arise among the artists about placing them."

5. The division between the two bodies of artists was not caused by disputes respecting a charge for admission. When the Committee first applied, in 1760, for permission to hold the exhibition they asked that a charge of one shilling should be made on entrance, but the Society of Arts refused this, and the exhibition held before the division among the artists was free.

6. The Free Society equally with the Incorporated Society devoted the proceeds of the exhibitions (arising from the sale of catalogues, &c.) to the relief of distress among their members. 7. The reason given by MR. STEPHENS for the formation of the Royal Academy may have had its influence, but it was not the chief one. Considering the position at one time of the Incorporated Society, with the support of the king and of the chief artists, it is strange that it should have sunk so low as it did before its death. In spite of the constant urging of its best friends, it would not establish a school, and it would do nothing for teaching. The more far-sighted artists were disgusted, and the result was the formation of the Royal Academy.

MR. STEPHENS appears to be animated with a prejudice against the Society of Arts, for he writes, p. 50, "the Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce, as that particularly big-wigged and bumptious body called itself"; and again, "the Society of Arts, with characteristic pedantry." These judgments are, I submit, unjust, and MR. STEPHENS gives no reason for his unfavourable estimate of the work of the Society of Arts. HENRY B. WHEATLEY.

PORTRAITS OF JOHN KEATS (8th S. viii. 324, 450, 470; ix. 89).-There is absolutely no evidence, external or internal, in favour of the new theory that the original miniature of Keats, executed from the life by Severn, is in America. There is no mystery as to how George Keats can have got the copy which he mentioned to his sister in 1825. He went to America in 1818, and was back in England in January, 1820. In the mean time Severn had exhibited at the Royal Academy the celebrated miniature which Keats, after the exhibition, presented to his promessa sposa. There was plenty of time for George Keats to obtain a copy from Severn, though the shortness of the interval between his return to England and his second departure might account for the inferiority of the copy now in America. Severn made many copies of his portraits, and Keats knew his price for making them; for in June, 1819, he wrote to his sister, who wanted a portrait of him, "The head Mr. Severn did of me is now too dear, but here inclosed is a very capital Profile done by Mr. Brown." Later on, however, she also had one of Severn's copies of the miniature-& rather good one. Keats's friends knew perfectly well that it was the original which he gave Miss Brawne. His sister knew it; his betrothed knew it; Severn knew it; Mr. William Dilke knew it; and, above all, Charles Wentworth Dilke, who had obtained another of the copies, was fully alive to the importance of what was passing into his hands when the miniature held by Miss Brawne long after she became Mrs. Lindon was transferred from her possession to his. And all these friends lived well into the time when Keate's fame was established, and long enough to impart their know. ledge to qualified investigators still alive and not yet in their dotage.

It is very unlikely that George Keats's family would have any accurate knowledge of the minute history of the portraits he owned; and no credence is due to the supposition that he took out even the portrait of himself. The natural assumption is that he did not. In December, 1818, Keats wrote to his brother and sister-in-law: "I have your Miniature on the Table George the great-its [sic] very like-though not quite about the upper lip. I wish we had a better of you, little George." And after the poet's death George wrote home (in 1824) to know what had become of "some miniatures which can be of no value to any one but me." The likeliest theory is that that application led to the expatriation of the miniatures of George and Georgiana Keats. Why on earth should a young fellow take his own miniature to America with him? From all we know of George Keats, we can believe very well that, if he had it, he would not want it with him; but we cannot so easily believe that he would leave his brother without it.

H. BUXTON FORMAN.

ARMS OF THE SEE OF CANTERBURY (8th S. viii. 128, 169, 232, 293, 450, 490; ix. 29).—It is, perhaps, difficult to write more upon this subject without infringing rules very properly laid down by 'N. & Q.'; but Mr. ST. JOHN HOPE makes two statements to which I have a word to say in reply. 1. "The view taken by our brethren of the Roman obedience as to certain matters of historical fact has nothing to do with the point at issue." 2. “Inasmuch as the present Archbishop [Dr. Benson] is every whit as much Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis Catholicus' as his predecessors from Augustine downwarde." Now is not this begging the question? We are accused of filching the arms of a certain see. We say there is, and has been for three hundred years, no such see in existence. This is, rightly or wrongly, our view, and, I think, has something to do " with the point at issue." How can we take away the arms of a see which (in our judgment) does not exist? Again, it is urged that Cardinal Vaughan's impalement possesses no authority from the College of Arms. I admit this, and regret the assumption of the impalement. It is, as DOM OSWALD observed, a purely mundane matter; and so I have a right to my opinion. But is Cardinal Vaughan a greater sinner in this respect than Archbishop Benson? For, as has been pointed out, the paternal coat of Benson used by his Grace is assumed without any authority from the officers GEORGE ANGUS.

of Arms.

St. Andrews, N.B.

I was quite aware of the different examples of fringed palls which DR. WICKHAM LEGG and MR. ST. JOHN HOPE have referred me to in their interesting letters, and I could supply them with many more examples, some with and some without fringes, and also of palls with red and purple crosses and with no crosses at all; but my argument was rather to show that a liturgical pall and a "seal engraver's" pall (as MR. ST. JOHN HOPE calls the modern blazon of the arms of the see of Canterbury) are very far from being identical. Mr. Woodward very truly observes ('Ecclesiastical Heraldry,' p. 498) that if the pallium is proper it should be tinctured white, and that it should not be argent with a golden border and fringe, nor should the crosses be patées fitchées.

MR. ST. JOHN HOPE's knowledge and experience in seals is much more extensive than my own, but I must call his attention to the fact that there are examples of palls without fringes in the seals of two of the archbishops he quotes as evidence to the contrary. The brass of Archbishop Grenefield (1305) in York Minster, it is true, has a fringed pall, but on a seal of the same archbishop that I have lately seen there is no fringe, nor is there any on a seal of Archbishop Neville (1374). In some cases this fringe, or rather shag, is very likely the artist's method of indicating the texture of the

lamb's wool of which the pall is composed, for "Pictoribus atque poetis quidlibet audendi semper fuit æqua potestas.'

Palls for many centuries have had attached to their ends two leaden weights covered with black silk, examples of which were found some few years ago in the tomb of Archbishop Hubert Walter (1193) at Canterbury Cathedral. These at the time I was allowed to examine, and on comparing them with those on the pall of Pius IX., which I possess, they appeared in every way identical. This pall came into my possession at the Pope's death, and is the one with which he was invested on 21 June, 1846, by Cardinal Tommaso RiarioSforza, the first Deacon, on the occasion of his coronation, but which six years afterwards he changed for another, in which latter he was in 1878 buried.

The length of a pall is shorter than it was in the sixteenth century, otherwise its form remains Till the middle of the substantially the same. thirteenth century its crosses were probably red; since that period they have been black. I do not deny that in early times they may have had fringes, but certainly for many centuries they have had none, and their decoration is not left to the whim or taste of an artist or vestment maker, as in the case of a stole or maniple, but is placed under the strict and careful supervision of a high official of the Roman Curia. I had myself the privilege of assisting last year on 19 March at the consecration of a number of palls by the present Pope This ceremony usually in his private chapel. takes place on the Vigil of SS. Peter and Paul, 28 June, but owing to the large number of archbishops preconized at the consistory in March there were not sufficient palls in readiness. For examples of the Pallium Latinum vigens and the Pallium Latinum vetus I would refer your correspondents to Vespasiani, 'De Sacri Pallii origine Disquisitio,' Romæ, 1856, in which very accurate drawings are given of them, as also of the Greek HARTWELL D. GRISSELL. and Syriac palls.

Oxford.

[blocks in formation]

back of the title, and follows an "Oratio devotis-in most other works printed abroad which pursima ad Virginem Mariam," of which the con- port to give a complete collection of the poet's cluding lines are:

Auchterarder.

Ut a morbo pestilentiæ
Et ab omni pravo scelere
Nos defendat semp. et hodie
Maria stella maris.

A. G. REID.

RICHARD COSWAY, R.A. (8th S. ix. 7, 74).—I am much obliged to MRS. GAMLIN and MR. H. G. HOPE for the information which they have supplied regarding Cosway's monument in St. Marylebone Parish Church, and at the same time I must apologize to the memory of Mr. Thomas Smith, for I find, on again referring to his book, that the tablet in question is duly entered in his list, although he gives no copy of the inscription. It seems the artist died while taking a drive in his carriage, and I will therefore alter the form of my query and ask, In which house in Edgware Road was he residing at the time of his death?

Kingsland, Shrewsbury.

W. F. PRIDEAUX.

THE LATE JAMES DIXON (8th S. ix. 101).-It is a pleasure to me to record that this library received several visits from Mr. Dixon. One correction should be made in DR. MURRAY'S note. He was buried not in the "Ore Cemetery "-a small parochial ground-but in the Hastings Borough Cemetery, which is in Ore parish. He was brother-in-law of the well-known author of "The Washingtons,' the Rev. J. N. Simpkinson.

EDWARD H. MARSHALL, M.A.

The Brassey Institute, Hastings.

SAMUEL WILLIAM RYLEY (8th S. ix. 87, 112).S. W. Ryley, the 'Itinerant,' was born in London. After the death of his father, his mother removed to Chester, and after a time he was bound apprentice to a Mr. Kenworthy, woollen cloth manufacturer, of Quick, in Saddleworth, Yorkshire On the return of Mr. Kenworthy's daughter Ann from the boarding-school he fell in love with her, and eloped with her to Gretna Green. He ended his days in poor circumstances at Parkgate, on 12 Sept., 1837, aged eighty-two years; and was interred in Neston Churchyard, Cheshire.

G. H. A.

S. W. Ryley was apprenticed to William Kenworthy, of Quickwood, of Saddleworth, co. York, to learn the woollen cloth trade. He ran away with Anne, his master's daughter (who was baptized at St. George's Church, Mossley, 9 Dec., 1759), and married her at Gretna Green, 15 Sept., JOHN RADCLIFFE.

1776.

LETTER OF LORD BYRON (8th S. ix. 86, 112). -The letter quoted by MR. CORKE is well known. It does not appear in Moore's 'Life of Byron,' but

letters. It is, of course, possible that your correspondent has thus accidentally acquired the original letter written in Byron's hand; but he may have only lit upon one of the many forgeries which were once so freely hawked about by a young gentleman who called himself Byron's son. There is no one better able to pronounce an opinion on that subject than Mr. John Murray, who has had a lifelong experience of Byronic MSS. RICHARD EDGCUMBE.

33, Tedworth Square, Chelsea.

MR. CORKE is an impression of an engraved facI have little doubt that the letter referred to by simile published in Galignani's edition of Byron's works. Curiously enough, this facsimile has taken in several persons, and on two or three occasions I have had separate impressions submitted to me for an opinion by collectors who have had them offered to them for purchase as Byron autographs. JOHN MURRAY.

SIR GIDEON MURRAY (8th S. ix. 87).-Your that Sir Gideon Murray, of Elibank, was an correspondent CLIO'S query would seem to suggest obscure Border laird, instead of a great officer of State, one of the most distinguished courtiers of his day, and ancestor of a well-known and still existing be found in the 'Dictionary of National Biography, peerage. Information of the fullest character will vol. xxxix. p. 364; Wood's Douglas's Peerage of Scotland,' vol. i. p. 525; and also, as to his wife Margaret Pentland, in Stodart's Scottish Arms,’ vol. ii.

JOHN PARKES BUCHANAN.

Blackbarony, Peeblesshire, by Griselda Bethune, He was the third son of Sir John Murray, of married Margaret Pentland, and by her had two sons: (1) Patrick, created a baronet in 1628 and Baron Elibank in 1643; (2) Walter, of Livingstone, Linlithgowshire; and a daughter Agnes, married to Sir William Scott, of Harden. Sir Gideon, who was a Lord of Session with the title of Lord Elibank, died on 28 June, 1621.

OSWALD HUNTER BLAIR, O.S.B.

Fort Augustus, N.B.

Sir Gideon Murray, of Glenpottie, afterwards Elibank, alias Eliburne, third son of Sir John land, and had two sons: (1) Patrick, who was Murray, of Black barony, married Margaret Pentcreated a baronet 16 May, 1628, and advanced to the dignity of the peerage by the title of Lord Elibank by patent dated Oxford, 18 March, 1643; (2) Walter, of Livingstone; and a daughter Agnes, who married Sir William Scott, of Harden.

JOHN RADCLIFFE.

also Douglas's Peerage of Scotland,' Wood, 1813,
See 'Dict. Nat. Biog.,' vol. xxxix. pp. 364-6.
p. 525.
J. B. FLEMING.

« AnteriorContinuar »