Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

certainly bore the same arms (without, of course,
the Scotch tressures) and whose very early members
had apparently no s at the end of their name, as
at present; moreover, the early Christian names
of the English family were curiously similar to
those given in the early accounts of the Scotch
family. I found an interesting seal in the London
Record Office of John Lyon, son of the above,
which shows a bendlet dexter engrailed. Had this
any significance ?-as his son, Patrick Lyon, first
Lord Glamis, bore no such bendlet.
W. LYON.

7, Redcliffe Square, S.W.

A MS. ITALIAN TRANSLATION OF VARILLAS. -The historical works of Antoine Varillas are relished for their piquancy, in spite of their dubious veracity. Still, Bayle quotes largely from them. That these writings were esteemed by his contemporaries is shown by an Italian MS. translation of the History of Francis I.' which I have recently acquired. The preface is probably a version of that of the first edition, published at La Haye in 1684. The MS. is certainly in contemporary writing, and is of that flowing Spanish type which had replaced the cramped calligraphy of an earlier date. The translation fills two thick quarto volumes. Perhaps some reader of N. & Q.' might be able to state, or to conjecture, who the translator was. I can find no mention of him in Fontanini, Zeno, or Haym.

EDWARD PERCY JACOBSEN.

18, Gordon Street, W.C.

SUSSEX HOUSE, FULHAM.-This house is said to have been called after Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex, sixth son of George III. Did the prince ever really live there? If so, between what years; and where can I ascertain any particulars as to his life there? I should be glad, also, of any information touching Mrs. Billington's connexion with the house. The late Dr. Forbes Benignus Wilson for many years kept the house as an asylum for the insane. I should like to know when he went to reside there. He had, I believe, two asylums in West London. Can any reader tell me the name of the second? Was it Brandenburgh House, facing the Fulham Palace Road? Kindly reply direct.

CHAS. JAS. FERET.

49, Edith Road, West Kensington.

size. But they were of a dirty yellow brown
colour, and spotted for their whole length with
brown spots of a darker shade. To my question,
"What do you call those fish?" I got the reply:
"Usses, sir" (or "Osses "). But neither my in-
formant nor the fish-auctioneer nor his clerk, who
seemed to be men of better position and intel-
ligence, could give me any explanation as to the
meaning or origin of the name, or even as to the
correct spelling of it. Can any reader of 'N. & Q.'
throw any light on the subject?
EDWARD P. WOLFERSTAN.

Arts Club, Hanover Square.

[blocks in formation]

tell me what is meant by this expression, which I
"THE ARMS OF LIONEL."-Can any one kindly
find in several Wardrobe Rolls of the fourteenth
century? It does not refer to the son of Edward
III., for it occurs chiefly before his birth, and
when his shield is alluded to at a later period, it is
identified by the addition of the words,
King's son."
'the

and Lyonel"; again, in 1333-4, "a hall of Lumbard
Once it is "the arms of England
bordered with escocheons of the arms of Lyonel";
in 1329, a gold cup with four "escocheons de
arm' Leonelli in fundo.
was evidently well understood at the time.
The meaning of the term
HERMENTRUde.

[ocr errors]

"" 'CLICKING-TIME."—I have been unable to find, in any Yorkshire glossary, the compound word clicking-time, meaning twilight. It was first brought USSES OR OSSES.-Spending a few days lately under my notice, some weeks ago, in ordinary at Folkestone, I found myself constantly attracted conversation, and, recognizing it as a rara avis, I to the little fish-market at the eastern end of the made a note of it. Inquiries were then instituted town. The catch of fish, of many kinds, was most at three different places in Holderness (Swine, abundant, more especially of dog-fish, of which Burstwick, and Hollym), and natives of each place there were two species. One kind was of a uni-recognized the word as an old and familiar friend. form bluish grey; these were called "dogs." One person said it was called "clicking-time The other was of almost precisely similar conforma- because, when she was a girl, the boys and girls tion, though running, perhaps, a trifle larger in used "ti click hod o'yan anuther" (catch hold of

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

"Occurrerant tetræ et infesta nimis bestiolæ, quæ horribili impetu carinam et latera, puppimque et proram ita forti feriebant percussura, ut pelliceum tectum navis penetrales putarentur penetrare posse. Quae, ut qui inerant ibidem postea narrarunt, prope magnitudinem ranarum, aculeis permolestæ, non tamen volatiles sed natatiles, erant; sed et remorum infestabant palmulas." The story seems to be founded on known facts. What could the bestiola have been? Are there swarms of cuttle-fish in northern seas; and would they cling on to the oars, &c.? J. T. F.

Bp. Hatfield's Hall, Durham. TENERIFFE OR TENERIFE.-I shall be glad to know which is correct. JOHN LANGLEY.

SIR STEPHEN EVANCE.-Can any of your contributors say who were the parents of Sir Stephen Evance, of St. Edmund's the King and Martyr, Lombard Street; or where I can see a better pedigree than the incomplete one in the Visitation of London? A. EVANCE, F.R.G.S.

[ocr errors]

'THE BRITISH KNIGHT ERRANT.'-In Messrs, Boase and Courtney's Bibliotheca Cornubiensis' (vol. iii. p. 935) is entered "The British Knight Errant. A tale in two volumes. Lond., printed for W. Lane, Leadenhall Street, 1790. 12mo., pp. 163 and 154"; and appended is the note, The scene is laid at Launceston Castle." I have been unable to trace a copy of this in the British Museum Library. Is there known to be one in existence ? DUNHEVED.

Beplies.

RESIDENCE OF MRS. SIDDONS IN PADDINGTON.

(8th S. iii. 287, 396).

Since making my inquiry on this subject I have carefully examined the Crace collection of maps and views in the British Museum, as well as every other available authority, with the view of satisConsidering that the building has only disappeared factorily determining the point at issue. within little more than thirty years, it would not be supposed that the task would present much difficulty; but the great extension of building in Bayswater and Westbourne within recent years, and the devastation committed by the Great Western Railway, render the identification of sites in those districts no easy matter. Another element of doubt consists in the frequent changes that have occurred in street nomenclature, of which I shall give an instance further on.

The first question to determine seemed to be the site of Westbourne Manor House, in the vicinity of which the modern house known as Westbourne Place, of which Westbourne Farm was an appendage, was subsequently built. According to Lysons,* Westbourne Place was built by Isaac Ware, the architect, a little to the south of the old house, After several changes of ownership, it became the which was suffered to stand some years longer. property, in 1800, of Mr. Samuel Pepys Cockerell, who resided in it till his death in 1827. In the memoir of Ceckerell contained in the 'Dict. Nat. Biog.' the house is called Westbourne Lodge, but the fact that Westbourne Place was Cockerell's residence is confirmed by J. T. Smith, in his Nollekens and his Times,' vol. ii. p. 209. Lysons goes on to say that near Westbourne Place is an elegant cottage, the property of Mr. Cockerell, and for some years past the residence of Mrs. Siddons, who has expended a considerable sum upon its improvement and decoration." Campbell says that Mrs. Siddons came into occupation of the house in April, 1805, and she had therefore resided in it for six years when Lysons wrote in 1811.

[ocr errors]

Gutch's map of 1828, Bartlett and Butler's map of 1834, and Lucas's map of 1847, do not show Westbourne Place, but they agree in marking the site of Westbourne Manor House as lying to the north and slightly to the east of the second canal bridge on the Harrow Road. To the south of the large house is a smaller building, which I assume to be Mrs. Siddons's residence, subsequently known as Desborough Lodge or Desborough Cottage.

On Gutch's map the term "Desboroughs" is applied to two parcels of land lying north and south of the canal, and situated immediately to

*Environs of London,' second edition, 1811, vol. ii. pt. ii. pp. 599, 600.

the eastward of the Manor House boundaries. which I have shown was built over before 1847. The grounds of the Manor House were apparently The conclusion I have arrived at is that Westcomprised within the triangle of which the apex is bourne Farm, subsequently known as Desborough the church of St. Mary Magdalene and the base Lodge or Desborough Cottage, was situated at, or the Harrow Road, Clarendon Street and Ciren- close to, the present Desborough Street, and that it cester Street forming respectively the western and could not have been destroyed to make room for the eastern sides. The "Desboroughs" lay still fur- Great Western Railway, as Cunningham asserts. I ther to the eastward, and Desborough Lodge must, must, however, in fairness state that this conclusion I think, have occupied the site of a small street, is to some extent based on two assumptions. The or rather a cul-de-sac, which practically forms an first is that Westbourne Place, the residence of enclave of Cirencester Street, near the Harrow Mr. Cockerell, was identical with the Westbourne Road, and is still known as Desborough Street. Manor House of the maps. The second is that Westbourne Farm, the residence of Mrs. Siddons, was identical with Desborough Cottage, the residence of Charles Mathews and Madame Vestris. Neither of these assumptions is proved, but I think the evidence is all in favour of their correctness. It is just possible that Westbourne Place was on the site of a large enclosed piece of land, with a house, marked as Westbourne Park upon the maps. This house was situated at the southern portion of Westbourne Green, to the westward of the present Porchester Road, on land now occupied by Westbourne Park Road and the adjacent thoroughfares. If this view is correct, Mrs. Siddons's cottage may possibly have been swept away by the Great Western Railway; but as all the authorities state that it was in close vicinity to the land now occupied by the Lock Hospital, I do not think it could have been so far distant as Westbourne Park, and I have come across no evidence that corroborates any view except that which I have accepted. W. F. PRIDEAUX,

The view that Mrs. Siddons's residence lay on the northern or right-hand side of the Harrow Road as you proceed to Harrow is confirmed by the facsimile of a letter from Charles Mathews, in my possession, dated “Westbourne Green, Aug. 21, 1845," at the bottom of which is a rough sketch, indicating to a friend with whom an appointment had been made the whereabouts of the house, which is called by Mathews "Desborough Cottage." To the left of the picture is a distant view of the church of Harrow-on-the-Hill, while to the right of the spectator the gables of the cottage appear above a belt of shrubs and trees which surmount the garden palings. The mile-and-a-half stone from Tyburn Turnpike (no longer existing) is depicted in the right foreground. It is clear from the sketch that the cottage was on the northern side of the main road.

MR. GRIFFINHOOFE's suggestion that Desborough Lodge may have been somewhere on the site of Desborough Place is not, I think, confirmed by the maps. On the earlier ones the site of Desborough Place and the adjacent streets is occupied by a portion of Westbourne Green, but in Lucas's plan of 1847 the land is built over, and must have presented much the same appearance as it does at present. Hampden Street, Waverley Road, and Brindley Street are clearly marked, but the whole of the present Marlborough Street is shown as Desborough Terrace. Subsequently the portion of this street which faces the railway was called Desborough Place, and the remainder Marlborough Place. The whole has now been renamed Marlborough Street, and Desborough Place has disappeared. Marlborough Street means nothing, whereas the original name of Desborough Terrace partook of the nature of a landmark in indicating the site of old Desborough House, which I judge from the maps must have been in existence as late as 1834. Mr. Walford, in his 'Old and New London,' states that some vestiges of the old house are apparent in Desborough Place (now Marlborough Street), but I have failed to find any.

As Robins, in his 'Paddington, Past and Present,' says that Desborough Lodge was in existence as late as 1853, it could not have been situated on the site of the block of houses "on the north side of the railway and east of Royal Oak Station,"

Desboroughs is marked on the plan of Paddington parish, 1838 (not 1828 as printed). I remember the house where Madame Vestris lived being pointed out to me about the end of the forties. It lay a little off the Harrow Road (which here runs northwards), on the east side, on the south of the canal. Access to the house was by a carriage drive. The Lock Hospital is built on the north of the canal, and on the west side of the Harrow Road. Westbourne Manor House was on the opposite side of the Harrow Road to the hospital, and also beyond the canal.

Copies of Mr. Gutch's plan, and also a large plan of the district engraved for the now defunct Commissioners of Sewers for Westminster, &c., in 1840, can be seen at the library of the Royal Institute of British Architects, No. 9, Conduit Street, W.

Which was the house or the houses named Westbourne Place?—a property which belonged about 1749 to Isaac Ware, architect, who erected his house with old materials brought from Lord Chesterfield's house in May Fair (Lysons, Environs,' 1795, iii. 330). It was bought by another architect, Samuel Pepys Cockerell, who was residing there in 1796. Was Westbourne Place the same as Westbourne Manor House; or did it

apply to the portion called Desboroughs in this
inquiry? Lysons does not mention the Manor
House or Desboroughs, though he describes West-
bourne Place.
WYATT PAPWORTH.

·

It is very kind of the Bayswater Chronicle, 1884, to ascribe to a visitor" my remarks about the above house, which I well remember, and especially the very words in which I describe it in Old and New London,' comparing it to a "rural vicarage." My friend MR. GRIFFINHOOFE will find a back-front view of the old house, with the poplar trees in sight, at p. 216 of vol. v. (not vi.) of my work, and my description of it on pp. 214, 215. He will also see there what is said about Desborough Place. E. WALFORD, M.A. Ventnor.

INNSBRUCK HOFKIRCHE (8th S. ii. 81, 162, 211, 221, 315, 349, 409, 491).-Since sending you my last note on this subject, I have rediscovered a kind of semi-official account of the history of Maximilian's tomb by Dr. Schönherr, in vol. xi. of the Jahrbuch der kunst-historischen Sammlungen des oesterreichischen Kaiserhouses' (1890, pp. 140268). The account is extremely interesting and very elaborate, and is founded on original research among the various rich MS. collections of the imperial house of Austria. The author gives a list of the twenty-eight large statues surrounding the emperor's tomb, supplying, professedly, the names of the persons whom they were intended to represent from documentary sources, but unfortunately following too closely Baedeker's list and without taking the least trouble to notice the heraldic devices on the shields, and consequently without attempting to explain the glaring discrepancies since pointed out in 'N. & Q.'

[ocr errors]

The names of the first seventeen statues agree with DR. WOODWARD's list, with the exception of No. 4, which is given as Duke Albrecht II., the Wise," though the arms are those of an emperor. Then follow, after Kunigunda

18. Eleanor of Portugal, mother of Maximilian. 19. Mary of Burgundy, his first wife. 20. Elizabeth of Hungary, wife of "King" Albrecht II.

21. Godfrey of Bouillon.

22. "King" Albrecht I., in spite of the arms of Hungary.

23. Frederic IV., Duke of Austria and Count of Tyrol ("with the empty pockets ").

24. Leopold III., Duke of Austria. And omitting the next three, which are the same as in DR. WOODWARD'S list,

28. "King" Albrecht II., though the arms are not those of an emperor. Photographic reproductions of a dozen of the large statues are given in the volume. That of Arthur is shown without a shield, and that of Philip the Good, of Burgundy (No. 14), has the quartered shield of England and

France attached to it, just as DR. WOODWARD saw them in 1890. The shield of No. 18, however, correctly shows the arms of Portugal, and consequently Baedeker is right with regard to this lady.

The author does not seem to have any doubt about it that No. 8 was meant for the Arthur of

the legend. The tomb as originally designed was
to be on a larger scale than the present one, and
was to be surrounded by forty statues of the same
dimensions as the present twenty-eight. Of the forty
persons whom the statues were to represent, Maxi-
milian claimed thirty-eight as belonging to his
family circle, the two exceptions being the two
illustrious knights represented by the pair of statues
attributed to Vischer, namely, King Arthur_of
England and Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths,
who, according to the author, were merely invited
Of course, some modern genealogists
guests.
would greatly reduce the number of Maximilian's
ancestors; but we must not forget the fact that
genealogists at the beginning of the sixteenth cen-
tury were not so strict as those of our days, and
hence the many imaginary pedigrees which have
been prepared for Maximilian, and are preserved
in the imperial archives, must be viewed in the
spirit of the old emperor's times. Some of these
pedigrees, notably those illustrated by the "old
masters," have been published in past volumes of
They show numerous princes
the Jahrbuch.'
with shields charged with a lion rampant and
others quartering the three batrachia with the three
fleurs-de-lys. DR. WOODWARD calls the former
frogs; but were they not really meant for toads
(crapauds)?

[ocr errors]

The author publishes also reproductions of some designs for statues prepared by Gilg Sesselschreiber, the artist of several statues in the group, and by others. One of these sketches (not carried out) represents the English hero-king holding a shield charged with the arms of France and England quarterly, and on a shield of pretence a lion rampant, probably meant for Hapsburg, as the sketch bears the inscription, "Kuenig Artus zu Eangellandt, Grave zu Habepurg." This proves beyond doubt that the artist meant to represent the King Artus of the legend, and that he was under the impression that Arthur of Caerleon was a Count of Hapsburg and an ancestor of Maximilian. Another drawing shows a design for a statue of Bianca Maria. The arms assigned to her are a quartered shield, with an eagle displayed in the first and last, and the Visconti guivre in the intermediate quarters and on an inescutcheon a cross argent (?).

As regards the shield of statue No. 28, I have already stated in a previous note that history knows only one Albert, King of Hungary and Bohemia. As he was also King of the Romans, there is not the slightest doubt that he is repre

sented by statue No. 22. But if we removed the shield from No. 28 there would be some difficulty in finding a rightful owner for it among the persons represented by the other statues in the group. Hence I would suggest that it was intended either for Elizabeth of Hungary (No. 20) or more probably for an effigy of her son, Ladislaus V., which was to be included in the group and was actually cast, but condemned and not set up in the group. The design of the coat armour of the figure was considered too poor, and, owing probably to the sluggishness of the metal, the statue came out of the mould full of holes. Of course I do not mean to infer that the arms as depicted on the shield attached to No. 28 were ever borne by either Elizabeth or her son.

One more example to show how the artists employed by Maximilian and his executors treated heraldry. One of the forty statues included in the original design was to be that of King Stephen I., the Saint, of Hungary, for which a sketch was prepared by Christopher Amberger. The drawing is reproduced in the 'Jahrbuch, and shows the king with a shield: Quarterly, 1 and 4, barry of eight, 2 and 3, a triple mount surmounted by a patriarchal cross. Stephen reigned from 1000 to 1038, and, of course, so far as we know, had no coat of arms. There are important documents extant of the reign of one of his successors, Béla III. (1173-1196), on which the royal seal is still without the slightest trace of any heraldic device. The oldest representation of the arms of Hungary appears on a deed of King Imre (Emericus) of the year 1202; it shows barry of nine, gules and argent, the four upper strips of the field either being charged with nine lions passant (three, three, two, one), or probably only diapered and the diapering mistaken for lions. The oldest known use of the patriarchal cross as an heraldic device dates from the year 1243, but the arms barry of eight quartered with the patriarchal cross surmounting the triple mount, as shown by the artist, according to our present knowledge, were not borne by any king before Ladislaus V., who reigned from 1440 to 1457, that is more than four centuries after the death of Stephen I.

One interesting item of information in Dr. Schönherr's account is that Arthur's and Theodoric's statues, after being cast in 1513, were pawned, and remained in pawn for some years until the Imperial Exchequer could find money to redeem them.

L. L. K. "CANARY BIRD," AN OPPROBRIOUS TERM (8th S. i. 109, 198, 339; ii. 378, 433; iii. 395).—The John Udal referred to by Sutcliffe in 1592 is said to have been the worthy whom James I. complimented at the expense of all contemporary European scholars; nevertheless, Sutcliffe was pleased to characterize him as 66 a man utterly unlearned and very factious." He was a Cantab, who graduated from Trinity, though he began his collegiate career as a sizar at

Christ's. He became a minister at Kingston-onThames, but having got into trouble, from alleged complicity with the Martinists, he was silenced there, and being invited to Newcastle-upon-Tyne, lived and laboured in that town for something like a year. Diotrephes' and 'A Demonstration of Discipline' are attributed to his pen. Udal was summoned back to London to answer for his opinions, was committed to prison, and, at one time, condemned to execution; he was, however, spared to die the natural death of a broken heart in the Marshalsea, in 1592 or 1593. Thomas Cartwright, who has been called "the head and most learned" of the early Puritans, was for a | while his fellow captive.

The full title of my libel, or libellus, is as follows: An Answere to a Certaine Libel Supplicatorie, or rather Diffamatory, and also to Certaine Calumnious Articles, and Interrogatories, both printed and scattered in secret corners to the slaunder of the Ecclesiasticall state, and put forth vnder the name and title of a Petition directed to her Maiestie: Wherein not onely the friuolous discourse of the Petitioner is refuted, but also the accusation against the Disciplinarians his clyents iustified, and the slaunderous cauils at the present gouernment disciphered by Mathew Sutcliffe.

I fear me I was wrong in writing aforetime as though this work had been specially evoked by the publications of Udal and Cartwright, for great is the mystery of the Marprelate business, and I am not its soothsayer. Some former owner of my copy, who I naturally concluded was better informed than myself, wrote "Sutcliffe's Ans to Udal and Cartwright" on the fly-leaf opposite the title-page, and I too rashly accepted his conclusion. Udal and Cartwright do, indeed, receive ugly rubs from Sutcliffe, but they are only two out of many whom he attempts to chastise; and unless they wrote the 'Certaine Libel,' the authorship of which is hidden from me, 'An Answere' cannot have been mainly addressed to them. Sutcliffe assumes no manner of doubt touching its origin. He says:

"The writer of this Libel is wel knowen; I would he so well knewe himselfe. His bedlem fits also, and helpers he had in his writing, are knowen."-P. 104.

"A very undecent thing it seemeth to me, that a man not conuersant in studie of diuinitie should teach diuines, that a disordered companion should controll gouernors, and lawes: that a man lately distracted of his wit should teach law and order, neither knowing order, nor lawe."-Preface, B 3.

I do not know to which member of the early Puritan party such innuendoes best applied. Coppinger was somewhat of an enthusiast, and believed that the Holy Spirit gave him many strange directions (Bancroft's 'Dangerous Positions,' p. 144, &c.); but I am not aware that the cause was indebted to him for any literary support. Henry Nicholas, of the "Family of Love," must have had a screw loose somewhere, and I have wondered if, in 1592, Sutcliffe thought he had him to deal with,

« AnteriorContinuar »